Developing an Effective 

Evaluation Plan

Setting the course for 

effective program evaluation
Acknowledgements

This workbook was developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Office on 

Smoking and Health (OSH) and Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity (DNPAO) 

as part of a series of technical assistance workbooks for use by program managers, and 

evaluators. The workbooks are intended to offer guidance and facilitate capacity building on a 

wide range of evaluation topics. We encourage users to adapt the tools and resources in this 

workbook to meet their program’s evaluation needs.

This workbook applies the CDC Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health 

(www.cdc.gov/eval). The Framework lays out a six-step process for the decisions and activities 

involved in conducting an evaluation. While the Framework provides steps for program 

evaluation, the steps are not always linear and represent a more back-and-forth effort; some 

can be completed concurrently. In some cases, it makes more sense to skip a step and come 

back to it. The important thing is that the steps are considered within the specific context of 

your program.

The following individuals from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Office 

on Smoking and Health (OSH), and Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity 

(DNPAO), were primary contributors to the preparation of this publication:

S René Lavinghouze, MA, Evaluation Team Lead/OSH 

Jan Jernigan, PhD, Senior Evaluation Scientist/DNPAO

 The following also contributed to the preparation of this publication: 

LaTisha Marshall, MPH, Health Scientist/OSH; LCDR Adriane Niare, MPH CHES, Health 

Scientist/OSH; Kim Snyder, MPH, Contractor, ICF International; Marti Engstrom, MA, Evaluation 

Team Lead/OSH; Rosanne Farris, PhD, RD, Branch Chief/DNPAO

We also gratefully acknowledge the contributions ICF International provided in 

developing the graphics and copy editing.

For more information, contact: René Lavinghouze, Senior Evaluation Scientist in OSH at 

RLavinghouze@cdc.gov, or Jan Jernigan, Senior Evaluation Scientist in DNPAO at JJernigan1@

cdc.gov.

Suggested Citation: Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan: Setting the Course for Effective 

Program Evaluation. Atlanta, Georgia: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National 

Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 

Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity, 2011. 
Table of Contents

Part I: Developing Your Evaluation Plan ........................................................................1

Who is the audience for this workbook?...................................................................1

What is an evaluation plan? ....................................................................................1

Why do you want an evaluation plan? ......................................................................2

How do you write an evaluation plan? ......................................................................3

What are the key steps in developing an evaluation plan using 

CDC’s Framework for Program Evaluation? ..............................................................4

The Process of Participatory Evaluation Planning ......................................................6

Step 1: Engage Stakeholders .............................................................................6 

Defining the Purpose in the Plan..................................................................6

The ESW: Why should you engage stakeholders in developing 

the evaluation plan?....................................................................................7

Who are the program’s stakeholders?..........................................................8

How do you use an ESW to develop an evaluation plan?................................8

How are stakeholder’s roles described in the plan?.......................................9

Step 2: Describe the Program ..........................................................................12

Shared Understanding of the Program .......................................................12

Narrative Description ................................................................................12

Logic Model .............................................................................................13

Stage of Development...............................................................................14

Step 3: Focus the Evaluation ............................................................................18

Developing Evaluation Questions...............................................................19

Budget and Resources..............................................................................21
Step 4: Planning for Gathering Credible Evidence ..............................................23

Choosing the Appropriate Methods............................................................24

Credible Evidence.....................................................................................25

Measurement...........................................................................................25

Data Sources and Methods.......................................................................26

Roles and Responsibilities.........................................................................27

Evaluation Plan Methods Grid....................................................................27

Budget.....................................................................................................28

Step 5: Planning for Conclusions......................................................................30

Step 6: Planning for Dissemination and Sharing of Lessons Learned...................33

Communication and Dissemination Plans...................................................34

Ensuring Use............................................................................................37

One Last Note ..........................................................................................37

Pulling It All Together ............................................................................................40

References...........................................................................................................43

Part II: Exercise, Worksheets, and Tools......................................................................44

Step 1: 1.1 Stakeholder Mapping Exercise .............................................................45

Step 1: 1.2 Evaluation Purpose Exercise ................................................................50

Step 1: 1.3 Stakeholder Inclusion and Communication Plan Exercise .......................53

Step 1: 1.4 Stakeholder Information Needs Exercise................................................... 55

Step 2: 2.1 Program Stage of Development Exercise ..............................................57

Step 3: 3.1 Focus the Evaluation Exercise ..............................................................62

Step 4: 4.1 Evaluation Plan Methods Grid Exercise .................................................68

Step 4: 4.2 Evaluation Budget Exercise..................................................................73

Step 5: 5.1 Stakeholder Interpretation Meeting Exercise..........................................76

Step 6: 6.1 Reporting Checklist Exercise................................................................80

Tools and Templates: Checklist for Ensuring Effective Evaluation Reports.............80

Step 6: 6.2 Communicating Results Exercise..........................................................82
Outline: 7.1 Basic Elements of an Evaluation Plan...................................................88

Outline: 7.2 Evaluation Plan Sketchpad..................................................................88

Logic Model Examples..........................................................................................98

OSH Logic Models Example .............................................................................98

Preventing Initiation of Tobacco Use Among Young People...........................98

Eliminating Nonsmokers’ Exposure to Secondhand Smoke ..........................99

Promoting Quitting Among Adults and Young People .................................100

DNPAO Logic Model Example.........................................................................101

State NPAO Program—Detailed Logic Model ...........................................101

Resources.................................................................................................................102

Web Resources..................................................................................................102

Making your ideas stick, reporting, and program planning.....................................104

Qualitative Methods............................................................................................104

Quantitative Methods..........................................................................................105

Evaluation Use....................................................................................................105

OSH Evaluation Resources..................................................................................105

DNPAO Evaluation Resources..............................................................................108

Figures

Figure 1: CDC Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health........................5

Figure 2: Sample Logic Model .......................................................................... 13

Figure 3.1: Stage of Development by Logic Model Category.................................. 15

Figure 3.2: Stage of Development by Logic Model Category Example..................... 15

Figure 4.1: Evaluation Plan Methods Grid Example ...............................................27

Figure 4.2: Evaluation Plan Methods Grid Example ...............................................28

Figure 5: Communication Plan Table .................................................................36
Acronyms

BRFSS Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

DNPAO Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity

ESW Evaluation Stakeholder Workgroup

NIDRR National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

OSH Office on Smoking and Health

PRAMS Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System

YRBS Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance 
Part I: Developing Your Evaluation Plan

WHO IS THE AUDIENCE FOR THIS WORKBOOK? 

The purpose of this workbook is to help public health program managers, administrators, 

and evaluators develop a joint understanding of what constitutes an evaluation plan, why it 

is important, and how to develop an effective evaluation plan in the context of the planning 

process. This workbook is intended to assist in developing an evaluation plan but is not 

intended to serve as a complete resource on how to implement program evaluation. Rather, 

it is intended to be used along with other evaluation resources, such as those listed in the 

Resource Section of this workbook. The workbook was written by the staff of the Office 

on Smoking and Health (OSH) and the Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity 

(DNPAO) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and ICF International. 

However, the content and steps for writing an evaluation plan can be applied to any public 

health program or initiative. Part I of this workbook defines and describes how to write an 

effective evaluation plan. Part II of this workbook includes exercises, worksheets, tools, and 

a Resource Section to facilitate program staff and evaluation stakeholder workgroup (ESW) 

thinking through the concepts presented in Part I of this workbook. 

WHAT IS AN EVALUATION PLAN?

An evaluation plan is a written document that describes 

how you will monitor and evaluate your program, as well 

as how you intend to use evaluation results for program 

improvement and decision making. The evaluation plan 

clarifies how you will describe the “What,” the “How,” 

and the “Why It Matters” for your program. 

 The “What” reflects the description of your

program and how its activities are linked with the 

intended effects. It serves to clarify the program’s 

purpose and anticipated outcomes. 

The “How” addresses the process for implementing a program and provides 

information about whether the program is operating with fidelity to the program’s 

design. Additionally, the “How” (or process evaluation), along with output and/or 

short-term outcome information, helps clarify if changes should be made during 

implementation. 

An evaluation plan is a written 

document that describes how 

you will monitor and evaluate 

your program, so that you will 

be able to describe the “What”, 

the “How”, and the “Why It 

Matters” for your program 

and use evaluation results for 

program improvement and 

decision making.

1
2 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

 The “Why It Matters” provides the rationale for your program and the impact it has

on public health. This is also sometimes referred to as the “so what” question. 

Being able to demonstrate that your program has made a difference is critical to 

program sustainability. 

An evaluation plan is similar to a roadmap. It clarifies the steps needed to assess the 

processes and outcomes of a program. An effective evaluation plan is more than a 

column of indicators added to your program’s work plan. It is a dynamic tool (i.e., a “living 

document”) that should be updated on an ongoing basis to reflect program changes and 

priorities over time. An evaluation plan serves as a bridge between evaluation and program 

planning by highlighting program goals, clarifying measurable program objectives, and 

linking program activities with intended outcomes. 

WHY DO YOU WANT AN EVALUATION PLAN?

Just as using a roadmap facilitates progress on a long journey, an evaluation plan can 

clarify what direction your evaluation should take based on priorities, resources, time, and 

skills needed to accomplish the evaluation. The process of developing an evaluation plan 

in cooperation with an evaluation workgroup of stakeholders will foster collaboration and 

a sense of shared purpose. Having a written evaluation plan will foster transparency and 

ensure that stakeholders are on the same page with regards to the purpose, use, and users 

of the evaluation results. Moreover, use of evaluation results is not something that can be 

hoped or wished for but must be planned, directed, and intentional (Patton, 2008). A written 

plan is one of your most effective tools in your evaluation tool box.

A written evaluation plan can—

 create a shared understanding of the purpose(s), use, and users of the evaluation

results,

foster program transparency to stakeholders and decision makers,

increase buy-in and acceptance of methods,

connect multiple evaluation activities—this is especially useful when a program 

employs different contractors or contracts,

serve as an advocacy tool for evaluation resources based on negotiated priorities 

and established stakeholder and decision maker information needs,

help to identify whether there are sufficient program resources and time to 

accomplish desired evaluation activities and answer prioritized evaluation questions,

assist in facilitating a smoother transition when there is staff turnover,

facilitate evaluation capacity building among partners and stakeholders,
3

 provide a multi-year comprehensive document that makes explicit everything from 

stakeholders to dissemination to use of results, and

 facilitate good evaluation practice.

There are several critical elements needed to ensure that your evaluation plan lives up to its 

potential. These elements include ensuring (1) that your plan is collaboratively developed 

with a stakeholder workgroup, (2) that it is responsive to program changes and priorities, 

(3) that it covers multiple years if your project is ongoing, and (4) that it addresses your 

entire program rather than focusing on just one funding source or objective/activity. You 

will, by necessity, focus the evaluation based on feasibility, stage of development, ability 

to consume information, and other priorities that will be discussed in Steps 3 and 4 in this 

workbook. However, during the planning phase, your entire program should be considered 

by the evaluation group.

HOW DO YOU WRITE AN EVALUATION PLAN?

This workbook is organized by describing the elements of the evaluation plan within 

the context of using the CDC’s Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health 

(http://www.cdc.gov/eval/) and the planning process. The elements of an evaluation plan 

that will be discussed in this workbook include: 

 Title page: Contains an easily identifiable program name, dates covered, and basic 

focus of the evaluation.

 Intended use and users: Fosters transparency about the purpose(s) of the 

evaluation and identifies who will have access to evaluation results. It is important 

to build a market for evaluation results from the beginning. Clarifying the primary 

intended users, the members of the stakeholder evaluation workgroup, and the 

purpose(s) of the evaluation will help to build this market.

 Program description: Provides the opportunity for building a shared understanding 

of the theory of change driving the program. This section often includes a logic 

model and a description of the stage of development of the program in addition to a 

narrative description.

 Evaluation focus: Provides the opportunity to document how the evaluation focus 

will be narrowed and the rationale for the prioritization process. Given that there are 

never enough resources or time to answer every evaluation question, it is critical to 

work collaboratively to prioritize the evaluation based on a shared understanding 

of the theory of change identified in the logic model, the stage of development 
4 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

of the program, the intended uses of the evaluation, as well as feasibility issues. 

This section should delineate the criteria for evaluation prioritization and include a 

discussion of feasibility and efficiency.

 Methods: Identifies evaluation indicators and performance measures, data sources 

and methods, as well as roles and responsibilities. This section provides a clear 

description of how the evaluation will be implemented to ensure credibility of 

evaluation information.

 Analysis and interpretation plan: Clarifies how information will be analyzed and 

describes the process for interpretation of results. This section describes who will 

get to see interim results, whether there will be a stakeholder interpretation meeting 

or meetings, and methods that will be used to analyze the data.

 Use, dissemination, and sharing plan: Describes plans for use of evaluation 

results and dissemination of evaluation findings. Clear, specific plans for evaluation 

use should be discussed from the beginning. This section should include a broad 

overview of how findings are to be used as well as more detailed information about 

the intended modes and methods for sharing results with stakeholders. This is a 

critical but often neglected section of the evaluation plan.

WHAT ARE THE KEY STEPS IN DEVELOPING AN 

EVALUATION PLAN USING CDC’S FRAMEWORK FOR 

PROGRAM EVALUATION?

CDC’s Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health (1999) is a guide to effectively 

evaluate public health programs and use the findings for program improvement and 

decision making. While the framework is described in terms of steps, the actions are not 

always linear and are often completed in a back-and-forth effort that is cyclical in nature. 

Similar to the framework, the development of an evaluation plan is an ongoing process. 

You may need to revisit a step during the process and complete other discrete steps 

concurrently. Within each step of the framework, there are important components that are 

useful to consider in the creation of an evaluation plan.
5

Figure 1: CDC Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health

Steps:

1. Engage stakeholders.

2. Describe the 

program.

3. Focus the evaluation 

design. 

4. Gather credible 

evidence.

5. Justify conclusions.

6. Ensure use and share 

lessons learned.

In addition to CDC’s 

Framework for Program 

Evaluation in Public Health 

there are evaluation 

standards that will enhance 

the quality of evaluations by 

guarding against potential 

mistakes or errors in 

practice. The evaluation standards are grouped around four important attributes: utility, 

feasibility, propriety, and accuracy as indicated by the inner circle in Figure 1. 

 Utility: Serve information needs of intended users.

 Feasibility: Be realistic, prudent, diplomatic, 

and frugal.

 Propriety: Behave legally, ethically, and with due 

regard for the welfare of those involved and those 

affected.

 Accuracy: Evaluation is comprehensive and 

grounded in the data.

(The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation, 1994)

CDC’s Framework for Program Evaluation

It is critical to remember that 

these standards apply to 

all steps and phases of the 

evaluation plan.
6 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

THE PROCESS OF PARTICIPATORY EVALUATION PLANNING

Step 1: Engage Stakeholders 

Defining the Purpose in the Plan

Identifying the purpose of the evaluation is equally as important as identifying the end 

users or stakeholders who will be part of a consultative group. These two aspects of the 

evaluation serve as a foundation for evaluation planning, focus, design, and interpretation 

and use of results. The purpose of an evaluation influences the identification of stakeholders 

for the evaluation, selection of specific evaluation questions, and the timing of evaluation 

activities. It is critical that the program is transparent about intended purposes of the 

evaluation. If evaluation results will be used to determine whether a program should be 

continued or eliminated, stakeholders should know this up front. The stated purpose of the 

evaluation drives the expectations and sets the boundaries for what the evaluation can and 

cannot deliver. In any single evaluation, and especially in a multi-year plan, more than one 

purpose may be identified; however, the primary purpose can influence resource allocation, 

use, stakeholders included, and more. Purpose priorities in the plan can help establish the 

link between purposes and intended use of evaluation information. While there are many 

ways of stating the identified purpose(s) of the evaluation, they generally fall into three 

primary categories: 

1. Rendering judgments—accountability

2. Facilitating improvements—program development

3. Knowledge generation—transferability 

(Patton, 2008)

An Evaluation Purpose identification tool/worksheet is provided in Part II, Section 

1.2 to assist you with determining intended purposes for your evaluation.

1 2 3 4 5 6
7

1 2 3 4 5 6

The ESW: Why should you engage stakeholders in 

developing the evaluation plan?

A primary feature of an evaluation plan is the identification of 

an ESW, which includes members who have a stake or vested 

interest in the evaluation findings, those who are the intended 

users who can most directly benefit from the evaluation 

(Patton, 2008; Knowlton, Philips, 2009), as well as others who 

have a direct or indirect interest in program implementation. 

Engaging stakeholders in the ESW enhances intended users’ 

understanding and acceptance of the utility of evaluation 

information. Stakeholders are much more likely to buy into and 

support the evaluation if they are involved in the evaluation 

process from the beginning. Moreover, to ensure that the 

information collected, analyzed, and reported successfully 

meets the needs of the program and stakeholders, it is best 

to work with the people who will be using this information 

throughout the entire process.

Engaging stakeholders in an evaluation can have many 

benefits. In general, stakeholders include people who will use 

the evaluation results, support or maintain the program, or who 

are affected by the program activities or evaluation results. 

Stakeholders can help—

 determine and prioritize key evaluation questions

pretest data collection instruments,

facilitate data collection, 

implement evaluation activities,

increase credibility of analysis and interpretation of 

evaluation information, and

ensure evaluation results are used.

A Stakeholder Information Needs identification exercise is 

provided in Part II, Section 1.4 to assist you with determining 

stakeholder information needs.

The ESW is comprised 

of members who have a 

stake or vested interest 

in the evaluation 

findings and can most 

directly benefit from 

the evaluation. These 

members represent 

the primary users 

of the evaluation 

results and generally 

act as a consultative 

group throughout 

the entire planning 

process, as well as 

the implementation 

of the evaluation. 

Additionally, members 

sometimes facilitate the 

implementation and/or

the dissemination of

results. Examples 

include promoting 

responses to surveys, 

in-kind support 

for interviews, and 

interpretation meetings. 

The members can even 

identify resources to 

support evaluation 

efforts. The exact 

nature and roles of 

group members is up 

to you, but roles should 

be explicitly delineated 

and agreed to in the 

evaluation plan.
8 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

Several questions pertaining to stakeholders may arise among program staff, including: 

 Who are the program’s stakeholders?

How can we work with all of our stakeholders?

How are stakeholders’ role(s) described in the plan?

This section will help programs address these and other questions about stakeholders and 

their roles in the evaluation to guide them in writing an effective evaluation plan.

Who are the program’s stakeholders?

The first question to answer when the program begins to write its evaluation plan is to 

decide which stakeholders to include. Stakeholders are consumers of the evaluation results. 

As consumers, they will have a vested interest in the results of the evaluation. In general, 

stakeholders are those who are 1) interested in the program and would use evaluation 

results, such as clients, community groups, and elected officials; 2) those who are involved 

in running the program, such as program staff, partners, management, the funding source, 

and coalition members; and 3) those who are served by the program, their families, or the 

general public. Others may also be included as these categories are not exclusive.

How do you use an ESW to develop an evaluation plan?

It is often said of public health programs, “everyone is your stakeholder.” Stakeholders will 

often have diverse and, at times, competing interests. Given that a single evaluation cannot 

answer all possible evaluation questions raised by diverse groups it will be critical that the 

prioritization process is outlined in the evaluation plan and that the stakeholder groups 

represented are identified. 

It is suggested that the program enlist the aid of an ESW of 8 to 10 members that 

represents the stakeholders who have the greatest stake or vested interest in the 

evaluation (Centers for Disease Control, 2008). These stakeholders, or primary intended 

users, will serve in a consultative role on all phases of the evaluation. As members of 

the ESW, they will be an integral part of the entire evaluation process from the initial 

design phase to interpretation, dissemination, and ensuring use. Stakeholders will play 

a major role in the program’s evaluation, including consultation and possibly even data 

collection, interpretation, and decision making based on the evaluation results. Sometimes 

stakeholders can have competing interests that may come to light in the evaluation 

planning process. It is important to explore agendas in the beginning and come to a shared 

1 2 3 4 5 6
9

1 2 3 4 5 6

understanding of roles and responsibilities, as well as the purposes of the evaluation. It is 

important that both the program and the ESW understand and agree to the importance and 

role of the workgroup in this process. 

In order to meaningfully engage your stakeholders, you will need to allow time for resolving 

conflicts and coming to a shared understanding of the program and evaluation. However, 

the time is worth the effort and leads toward a truly participatory, empowerment approach 

to evaluation.

How are stakeholder’s roles described in the plan?

It is important to document information within your written evaluation plan based on the 

context of your program. For the ESW to be truly integrated into the process, ideally, they 

will be identified in the evaluation plan. The form this takes may vary based on program 

needs. If it is important politically, a program might want to specifically name each member 

of the workgroup, their affiliation, and specific role(s) on the workgroup. If a workgroup 

is designed with rotating membership by group, then the program might just list the 

groups represented. For example, a program might have a workgroup that is comprised 

of members that represent funded programs (three members), non-funded programs 

(one member), and national partners (four members) or a workgroup that is comprised 

of members that represent state programs (two members), community programs (five 

members), and external evaluation expertise (two members). Being transparent about 

the role and purpose of the ESW can facilitate buy-in for evaluation results from those 

who did not participate in the evaluation—especially in situations where the evaluation is 

implemented by internal staff members. Another by-product of workgroup membership is 

that stakeholders and partners increase their capacity for evaluation activities and increase 

their ability to be savvy consumers of evaluation information. This can have downstream 

impacts on stakeholder’s and partner’s programs such as program improvement and 

timely, informed decision making. A stakeholder inclusion chart or table can be a useful tool 

to include in your evaluation plan. 

A Stakeholder Mapping exercise and engagement tool/worksheet is provided in Part II, 

Sections 1.1 and 1.1b to assist you with planning for your evaluation workgroup.
10 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

The process for stakeholder engagement should also be described in other steps related to 

the development of the evaluation plan, which may include:

Step 2: Describe the program. A shared understanding of the program and what 

the evaluation can and cannot deliver is essential to the success of implementation of 

evaluation activities and use of evaluation results. The program and stakeholders must 

agree upon the logic model, stage of development description, and purpose(s) of the 

evaluation.

Step 3: Focus the evaluation. Understanding the purpose of the evaluation and the 

rationale for prioritization of evaluation questions is critical for transparency and acceptance 

of evaluation findings. It is essential that the evaluation address those questions of greatest 

need to the program and priority users of the evaluation.

Step 4: Planning for gathering credible evidence. Stakeholders have to accept that 

the methods selected are appropriate to the questions asked and that the data collected 

are credible or the evaluation results will not be accepted or used. The market for and 

acceptance of evaluation results begins in the planning phase. Stakeholders can inform the 

selection of appropriate methods.

Step 5: Planning for conclusions. Stakeholders should inform the analysis 

and interpretation of findings and facilitate the development of conclusions and 

recommendations. This in turn will facilitate the acceptance and use of the evaluation 

results by other stakeholder groups. Stakeholders can help determine if and when 

stakeholder interpretation meetings should be conducted.

Step 6: Planning for dissemination and sharing of lessons learned. Stakeholders 

should inform the translation of evaluation results into practical applications and actively 

participate in the meaningful dissemination of lessons learned. This will facilitate ensuring 

use of the evaluation. Stakeholders can facilitate the development of an intentional, 

strategic communication and dissemination plan within the evaluation plan.

1 2 3 4 5 6
11

1 2 3 4 5 6

EVALUATION PLAN TIPS FOR STEP 1

 Identify intended users who can directly benefit from and use the evaluation 

results. 

 Identify a evaluation stakeholder workgroup of 8 to 10 members.

 Engage stakeholders throughout the plan development process as well as the 

implementation of the evaluation.

 Identify intended purposes of the evaluation.

 Allow for adequate time to meaningfully engage the evaluation stakeholder 

workgroup.

EVALUATION TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STEP 1:

 1.1 Stakeholder Mapping Exercise

 1.1b Stakeholder Mapping Exercise Example

 1.2 Evaluation Purpose Exercise

 1.3 Stakeholder Inclusion and Communication Plan Exercise

 1.4 Stakeholder Information Needs

AT THIS POINT IN YOUR PLAN, YOU HAVE—

 identified the primary users of the evaluation

created the evaluation stakeholder workgroup, and

defined the purposes of the evaluation.
12 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Step 2: Describe the Program

Shared Understanding of the Program

The next step in the CDC Framework and the evaluation 

plan is to describe the program. A program description 

clarifies the program’s purpose, stage of development, 

activities, capacity to improve health, and implementation 

context. A shared understanding of the program and what 

the evaluation can and cannot deliver is essential to the 

successful implementation of evaluation activities and 

use of evaluation results. The program and stakeholders must agree upon the logic model, 

stage of development description, and purpose(s) of the evaluation. This work will set the 

stage for identifying the program evaluation questions, focusing the evaluation design, and 

connecting program planning and evaluation. 

Narrative Description

A narrative description helps ensure a full and complete shared understanding of the 

program. A logic model may be used to succinctly synthesize the main elements of a 

program. While a logic model is not always necessary, a program narrative is. The program 

description is essential for focusing the evaluation design and selecting the appropriate 

methods. Too often groups jump to evaluation methods before they even have a grasp 

of what the program is designed to achieve or what the evaluation should deliver. Even 

though much of this will have been included in your funding application, it is good practice 

to revisit this description with your ESW to ensure a shared understanding and that the 

program is still being implemented as intended. The description will be based on your 

program’s objectives and context but most descriptions include at a minimum:

 A statement of need to identify the health issue addresse

Inputs or program resources available to implement program activities

Program activities linked to program outcomes through theory or best practice 

program logic

Stage of development of the program to reflect program maturity

Environmental context within which a program is implemented

A program description clarifies 

the program’s purpose, stage 

of development, activities, 

capacity to improve health, 

and implementation context. 
13

1 2 3 4 5 6

Logic Model

The description section often includes a logic model to visually show the link between 

activities and intended outcomes. It is helpful to review the model with the ESW to ensure 

a shared understanding of the model and that the logic model is still an accurate and 

complete reflection of your program. The logic model should identify available resources 

(inputs), what the program is doing (activities), and what you hope to achieve (outcomes). 

You might also want to articulate any challenges you face (the program’s context or 

environment). Figure 2 illustrates the basic components of a program logic model. As you 

view the logic model from left to right, the further away from the intervention the more time 

needed to observe outcomes. A major challenge in evaluating chronic disease prevention 

and health promotion programs is one of attribution versus contribution and the fact that 

distal outcomes may not occur in close proximity to the program interventions or policy 

change. In addition, given the complexities of dynamic implementation environments, 

realized impacts may differ from intended impacts. However, the rewards of understanding 

the proximal and distal impacts of the program intervention often outweigh the challenges.

Logic model elements include:

Inputs: Resources necessary for program implementation

Activities: The actual interventions that the program implements in order to achieve health 

outcomes

Outputs: Direct products obtained as a result of program activities

Outcomes (short-term, intermediate, long-term, distal): The changes, impacts, or results of 

program implementation (activities and outputs)

Figure 2: Sample Logic Model
14 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Stage of Development

Another activity that will be needed to fully describe your program and prepare you to 

focus your evaluation is an accurate assessment of the stage of development of the 

program. The developmental stages that programs typically move through are planning, 

implementation, and maintenance. In the example of a policy or environmental initiative, 

the stages might look somewhat like this:

1. Assess environment and assets.

2. Policy or environmental change is in development.

3. The policy or environmental change has not yet been approved.

4. The policy or environmental change has been approved but not implemented.

5. The policy or environmental change has been in effect for less than 1 year.

6. The policy or environmental change has been in effect for 1 year or longer.

Steps 1 through 3 would typically fall under the planning stages, Steps 4 and 5 under 

implementation, and Step 6 under maintenance. It is important to consider a developmental 

model because programs are dynamic and evolve over time. Programs are seldom fixed 

in stone and progress is affected by many aspects of the political and economic context. 

When it comes to evaluation, the stages are not always a “once-and-done” sequence of 

events. When a program has progressed past the initial planning stage, it may experience 

occasions where environment and asset assessment is still needed. Additionally, in a 

multi-year plan, the evaluation should consider future evaluation plans to prepare datasets 

and baseline information for evaluation projects considering more distal impacts and 

outcomes. This is an advantage of completing a multi-year evaluation plan with your 

ESW—preparation!

The stage of development conceptual model is complementary to the logic model. Figure 

3.1 shows how general program evaluation questions are distinguished by both logic model 

categories and the developmental stage of the program. This places evaluation within the 

appropriate stage of program development (planning, implementation, and maintenance). 

The model offers suggested starting points for asking evaluation questions within the 

logic model while respecting the developmental stage of the program. This will prepare 

the program and the workgroup to focus the evaluation appropriately based on program 

maturity and priorities. 
15

1 2 3 4 5 6

Figure 3.1: Stage of Development by Logic Model Category

Developmental Stage Program 

Planning

Program 

Implementation

Program 

Maintenance

Logic Model Category Inputs and Activities Outputs and Short-term 

Outcomes

Intermediate and 

Long-term Outcomes

Figure 3.2: Stage of Development by Logic Model Category Example

Developmental Stage Program 

Planning

Program 

Implementation

Program 

Maintenance

Example: 

Developmental 

Stages When 

Passing a Policy

Assess environment 

and assets

Develop policy

The policy has not 

yet been passed

The policy has been 

passed but not 

implemented

The policy has been 

in effect for 

less than 1 year

The policy has been 

in effect for 

1 year or longer

Example: 

Questions Based 

on Developmental 

Stage When 

Passing a Policy

Is there public support 

for the policy?

What resources 

will be needed 

for implementation 

of the policy?

Is there compliance 

with the policy?

Is there continued 

or increased public 

support for the policy?

Are there major 

exemptions or loopholes 

to the policy?

What is the 

health impact 

of the policy?
16 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Key evaluation questions and needs for information will differ based on the stage of 

development of the program. Additionally, the ability to answer key evaluation questions 

will differ by stage of development of the program and stakeholders need to be aware 

of what the evaluation can and cannot answer. For the above policy program example, 

planning stage type questions might include:

 Is there public support for the policy

What resources will be needed for implementation of the policy?

Implementation stage questions might include:

Is there compliance with the policy?

Is there continued or increased public support for the policy?

Are there major exemptions or loopholes to the policy?

Maintenance stage questions might include:

What is the economic impact of the policy?

What is the health impact of the policy?

For more on stage of development and Smoke-Free Policies, please see the Evaluation 

Toolkit for Smoke-Free Policies at http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/

secondhand_smoke/evaluation_toolkit/index.htm.

A Program Stage of Development exercise is included in Part II, Section 2.1. 
17

1 2 3 4 5 6

EVALUATION PLAN TIPS FOR STEP 2

 A program description will facilitate a shared understanding of the program

between the program staff and the evaluation workgroup. 

The description section often includes a logic model to visually show the link 

between activities and intended outcomes.

The logic model should identify available resources (inputs), what the program is 

doing (activities), and what you hope to achieve (outcomes).

A quality program evaluation is most effective when part of a larger conceptual 

model of a program and its development. 

EVALUATION TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STEP 2:

2.1 Program Stage of Development Exercise 

Evaluation Toolkit for Smoke-Free Policies at http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/

basic_information/secondhand_smoke/evaluation_toolkit/index.htm

AT THIS POINT IN YOUR PLAN, YOU HAVE—

identified the primary users of the evaluation,

created the evaluation stakeholder workgroup,

defined the purposes of the evaluation,

described the program, including context,

created a shared understanding of the program, and

identified the stage of development of the program.
18 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Step 3: Focus the Evaluation

The amount of information you can gather concerning your program is potentially limitless. 

Evaluations, however, are always restricted by the number of questions that can be 

realistically asked and answered with quality, the methods that can be employed, the 

feasibility of data collection, and the available resources. These are the issues at the 

heart of Step 3 in the CDC framework: focusing the evaluation. The scope and depth of 

any program evaluation is dependent on program and stakeholder priorities; available 

resources, including financial resources; staff and contractor availability; and amount of 

time committed to the evaluation. The program staff should work together with the ESW 

to determine the priority and feasibility of these questions and identify the uses of results 

before designing the evaluation plan. In this part of the plan, you will apply the purposes 

of the evaluation, its uses, and the program description to narrow the evaluation questions 

and focus the evaluation for program improvement and decision making. In this step, you 

may begin to notice the iterative process of developing the evaluation plan as you revisit 

aspects of Step 1 and Step 2 to inform decisions to be made in Step 3.

Useful evaluations are not about special research interests or what is easiest to implement 

but what information will be used by the program, stakeholders (including funders), and 

decision makers to improve the program and make decisions. Establishing the focus of the 

evaluation began with the identification of the primary purposes and the primary intended 

users of the evaluation. This process was further solidified through the selection of the ESW. 

Developing the purposeful intention to use evaluation information and not just produce 

another evaluation report starts at the very beginning with program planning and your 

evaluation plan. You need to garner stakeholder interests and prepare them for evaluation 

use. This step facilitates conceptualizing what the evaluation can and cannot deliver.

It is important to collaboratively focus the evaluation design with your ESW based on the 

identified purposes, program context, logic model, and stage of development. Additionally, 

issues of priority, feasibility, and efficiency need to be discussed with the ESW and those 

responsible for the implementation of the evaluation. Transparency is particularly important 

in this step. Stakeholders and users of the evaluation will need to understand why some 

questions were identified as high priorities while others were rejected or delayed. 

A Focus the Evaluation exercise is located in Part II, Section 3.1 of this workbook.
19

1 2 4 5 6 3

Developing Evaluation Questions

In this step, it is important to solicit evaluation questions from your various stakeholder 

groups based on the stated purposes of the evaluation. The questions should then 

be considered through the lens of the logic model/program description and stage of 

development of the program. Evaluation questions should be checked against the logic 

model and changes may be made to either the questions or the logic model, thus reinforcing 

the iterative nature of the evaluation planning process. The stage of development discussed 

in the previous chapter will facilitate narrowing the evaluation questions even further. It is 

important to remember that a program may experience characteristics of several stages 

simultaneously once past the initial planning stage. You may want to ask yourself this 

question: How long has your program been in existence? If your program is in the planning 

stage, it is unlikely that measuring distal outcomes will be useful for informing program 

decision making. However, in a multi-year evaluation plan, you may begin to plan for and 

develop the appropriate surveillance and evaluation systems and baseline information 

needed to measure these distal outcomes (to be conducted in the final initiative year) as 

early as year 1. In another scenario, you may have a coalition that has been established for 

10 years and is in maintenance stage. However, contextual changes may require you to 

rethink the programmatic approach being taken. In this situation, you may want to do an 

evaluation that looks at both planning stage questions (“Are the right folks at the table?” and 

“Are they really engaged?”), as well as maintenance stage questions (“Are we having the 

intended programmatic impact?”). Questions can be further prioritized based on the ESW 

and program information needs as well as feasibility and efficiency issues. 

Often if a funder requires an evaluation plan, you might notice text like this:

Submit with application a comprehensive written evaluation plan that includes activities 

for both process and outcome measures.

Distinguishing between process and outcome evaluation can be similar to considering 

the stage of development of your program against your program logic model. In general, 

process evaluation focuses on the first three boxes of the logic model: inputs, activities, 

and outputs (CDC, 2008). This discussion with your ESW can further facilitate the focus of 

your evaluation.
20 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Process Evaluation Focus

Process evaluation enables you to describe and assess your 

program’s activities and to link your progress to outcomes. This 

is important because the link between outputs and short-term 

outcomes remains an empirical question. 

 (CDC, 2008)

Outcome evaluation, as the term implies, focuses on the 

last three outcome boxes of the logic model: short-term, 

intermediate, and long-term outcomes.

Outcome Evaluation Focus

Outcome evaluation allows researchers to document health 

and behavioral outcomes and identify linkages between an 

intervention and quantifiable effects. 

 (CDC, 2008) 

As a program can experience the characteristics of several 

stages of development at once, so, too, a single evaluation 

plan can and should include both process and outcome 

evaluation questions at the same time. Excluding process 

evaluation questions in favor of outcome evaluation questions 

often eliminates the understanding of the foundation that supports outcomes.

As you and the ESW take ownership of the evaluation, you will find that honing the 

evaluation focus will likely solidify interest in the evaluation. Selection of final evaluation 

questions should balance what is most useful to achieving your program’s information 

needs while also meeting your stakeholders’ information needs. Having stakeholders 

participate in the selection of questions increases the likelihood of their securing evaluation 

Process and 

Outcome Evaluation 

in Harmony in the 

Evaluation Plan

As the program 

can experience the 

characteristics of 

several stages of 

development at once, 

so, too, a single 

evaluation plan can and 

often does include both 

process and outcome 

evaluation questions. 

Excluding process 

evaluation questions 

in favor of outcome 

evaluation questions 

often eliminates the 

understanding of 

the foundation that 

supports outcomes. 

Additional resources on 

process and outcome 

evaluation are identified 

in the Resource Section 

of this workbook.
21

1 2 4 5 6 3

resources, providing access to data, and using the results. This process increases 

“personal ownership” of the evaluation by the ESW. However, given that resources are 

limited, the evaluation cannot answer all potential questions.

The ultimate goal is to focus the evaluation design such that it reflects the program stage 

of development, selected purpose of the evaluation, uses, and questions to be answered. 

Transparency related to the selection of evaluation questions is critical to stakeholder 

acceptance of evaluation results and possibly even for continued support of the program. 

Even with an established multi-year plan, Step 3 should be revisited with your ESW 

annually (or more often if needed) to determine if priorities and feasibility issues still hold 

for the planned evaluation activities. This highlights the dynamic nature of the evaluation 

plan. Ideally, your plan should be intentional and strategic by design and generally cover 

multiple years for planning purposes. But the plan is not set in stone. It should also be 

flexible and adaptive. It is flexible because resources and priorities change and adaptive 

because opportunities and programs change. You may have a new funding opportunity 

and a short-term program added to your overall program. This may require insertion of a 

smaller evaluation plan specific to the newly funded project, but with the overall program 

evaluation goals and objectives in mind. Or, resources could be cut for a particular program 

requiring a reduction in the evaluation budget. The planned evaluation may have to be 

reduced or delayed. Your evaluation plan should be flexible and adaptive to accommodate 

these scenarios while still focusing on the evaluation goals and objectives of the program 

and the ESW.

Budget and Resources

Discussion of budget and resources (financial and human) that can be allocated to the 

evaluation will likely be included in your feasibility discussion. In the Best Practices for 

Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs (2007), it is recommended that at least 10% 

of your total program resources be allocated to surveillance and program evaluation. 

The questions and subsequent methods selected will have a direct relationship to the 

financial resources available, evaluation team member skills, and environmental constraints 

(e.g., you might like to do an in-person home interview of the target population, but the 

neighborhood is not one that interviewers can visit safely). Stakeholder involvement may 

facilitate advocating for the resources needed to implement the evaluation necessary 

to answer priority questions. However, sometimes, you might not have the resources 

necessary to fund the evaluation questions you would like to answer most. A thorough 
22 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

discussion of feasibility and recognition of real constraints will facilitate a shared 

understanding of what the evaluation can and cannot deliver. The process of selecting 

the appropriate methods to answer the priority questions and discussing feasibility and 

efficiency is iterative. Steps 3, 4, and 5 in planning the evaluation will often be visited 

concurrently in a back-and-forth progression until the group comes to consensus.

EVALUATION PLAN TIPS FOR STEP 3

It is not possible or appropriate to evaluate every aspect or specific initiative of a 

program every year.

Evaluation focus is context dependent and related to the purposes of the 

evaluation, primary users, stage of development, logic model, program priorities, 

and feasibility.

Evaluation questions should be checked against the logic model and stage of 

development of the program.

The iterative nature of plan development is reinforced in this step.

EVALUATION TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STEP 3:

3.1 Focus the Evaluation Exercise

AT THIS POINT IN YOUR PLAN, YOU HAVE—

identified the primary users of the evaluation,

created the evaluation stakeholder workgroup,

defined the purposes of the evaluation,

described the program, including context,

created a shared understanding of the program,

identified the stage of development of the program, and

prioritized evaluation questions and discussed feasibility, 

budget, and resource issues.
























23

1 2 3 5 6 4

Step 4: Planning for Gathering Credible Evidence

Now that you have solidified the focus of your evaluation and identified the questions to 

be answered, it will be necessary to select the appropriate methods that fit the evaluation 

questions you have selected. Sometimes the approach to evaluation planning is guided 

by a favorite method(s) and the evaluation is forced to fit that method. This could lead 

to incomplete or inaccurate answers to evaluation questions. 

Ideally, the evaluation questions inform the methods. If you have 

followed the steps in the workbook, you have collaboratively 

chosen the evaluation questions with your ESW that will provide 

you with information that will be used for program improvement 

and decision making. This is documented and transparent 

in your evaluation plan. Now is the time to select the most 

appropriate method to fit the evaluation questions and describe 

the selection process in your plan. Additionally, it is prudent to 

identify in your plan a timeline and the roles and responsibilities 

of those overseeing the evaluation activity implementation 

whether it is program or stakeholder staff. 

To accomplish this step in your evaluation plan, you will need 

to—

 keep in mind the purpose, logic model/program

description, stage of development of the program, 

evaluation questions, and what the evaluation can and 

cannot deliver,

confirm that the method(s) fits the question(s); there 

are a multitude of options, including but not limited 

to qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, multiple 

methods, naturalistic inquiry, experimental, quasiexperimental, 

think about what will constitute credible evidence for 

stakeholders or users,

identify sources of evidence (e.g., persons, documents, 

observations, administrative databases, surveillance systems) and appropriate 

methods for obtaining quality (i.e., reliable and valid) data,

identify roles and responsibilities along with timelines to ensure the project remains 

on-time and on-track, and

remain flexible and adaptive, and as always, transparent.

Fitting the Method 

to the Evaluation 

Question(s)

The method or 

methods chosen need 

to fit the evaluation 

question(s) and not be 

chosen just because 

they are a favored 

method or specifically 

quantitative or 

experimental in nature. 

A misfit between 

evaluation question 

and method can and 

often does lead to 

incomplete or even 

inaccurate information. 

The method needs to 

be appropriate for the 

question in accordance 

with the Evaluation 

Standards.
24 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 5 6 4

Choosing the Appropriate Methods

It is at this point that the debate between qualitative and quantitative methods usually 

arises. It is not that one method is right and one method is wrong, but which method or 

combination of methods will obtain answers to the evaluation questions. 

Some options that may point you in the direction of qualitative methods:

 You are planning and want to assess what to consider when designing a program or

initiative. You want to identify elements that are likely to be effective.

You are looking for feedback while a program or initiative is in its early stages and 

want to implement a process evaluation. You want to understand approaches to 

enhance the likelihood that an initiative (e.g., policy or environmental change) will be 

adopted.

Something isn’t working as expected and you need to know why. You need to 

understand the facilitators and barriers to implementation of a particular initiative.

You want to truly understand how a program is implemented on the ground and 

need to develop a model or theory of the program or initiative.

Some options that may point you in the direction of quantitative methods:

You are looking to identify current and future movement or trends of a particular 

phenomenon or initiative.

You want to consider standardized outcome across programs. You need to monitor 

outputs and outcomes of an initiative. You want to document the impact of a 

particular initiative.

You want to know the costs associated with the implementation of a particular 

intervention.

You want to understand what standardized outcomes are connected with a 

particular initiative and need to develop a model or theory of the program or initiative.

Or the most appropriate method may be a mixed methods approach wherein the qualitative 

data provide value, understanding, and application to the quantitative data. It is beyond 

the scope of this workbook to address the full process of deciding what method(s) are 

most appropriate for which types of evaluations questions. The question is not whether to 

apply qualitative or quantitative methods but what method is most appropriate to answer 

the evaluation question chosen. Additional resources on this are provided in the resource 

section in Part II.
25

1 2 3 5 6 4

Credible Evidence

The evidence you gather to support the 

answers to your evaluation questions 

should be seen as credible by the 

primary users of the evaluation. The 

determination of what is credible is 

often context dependent and can vary 

across programs and stakeholders. This 

determination is naturally tied to the 

evaluation design, implementation, and 

standards adhered to for data collection, 

analysis, and interpretation. Best 

practices for your program area and the 

evaluation standards included in the CDC 

Framework (Utility, Feasibility, Propriety, 

and Accuracy) and espoused by the 

American Evaluation Association (http://www.eval.org) will facilitate this discussion with your 

ESW. This discussion allows for stakeholder input as to what methods are most appropriate 

given the questions and context of your evaluation. As with all the steps, transparency 

is important to the credibility discussion as well as the documentation of limitation of 

the evaluation methods or design. This facilitates the likelihood that results will be more 

acceptable to stakeholders and strengthens the value of the evaluation and likelihood 

the information will be used for program improvement and decision making. The value of 

stakeholder inclusion throughout the development of your evaluation plan is prominent in 

Step 4. More information on the standards can be found in the resources section.

Measurement

If the method selected includes indicators and/or performance measures, the discussion 

of what measures to include is critical and often lengthy. This discussion is naturally tied to 

the data credibility conversation, and there is often a wide range of possible indicators or 

performance measures that can be selected for any one evaluation question. You will want 

to consult best practices publications for your program area and even other programs in 

neighboring states or locales. The expertise that your ESW brings to the table can facilitate 

this discussion. The exact selection of indicators or performance measures is beyond the 

scope of this workbook. Resource information is included in Part II of this workbook, such 

as the Key Outcome Indicators for Evaluating Comprehensive Tobacco Programs guide. 

CDC’s Framework for Program Evaluation
26 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 5 6 4

Data Sources and Methods

As emphasized already, it is important to select the method(s) most appropriate to answer 

the evaluation question. The types of data needed should be reviewed and considered for 

credibility and feasibility. Based on the methods chosen, you may need a variety of input, 

such as case studies, interviews, naturalistic inquiry, focus groups, standardized indicators, 

and surveys. You may need to consider multiple data sources and the triangulation of data 

for reliability and validity of your information. Data may come from existing sources (e.g., 

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance, Pregnancy 

Risk Assessment Monitoring System) or gathered from program-specific sources (either 

existing or new). You most likely will need to consider the establishment of surveillance and 

evaluation systems for continuity and the ability to successfully conduct useful evaluations. 

The form of the data (either quantitative or qualitative) and specifics of how these data will 

be collected must be defined, agreed upon as credible, and transparent. There are strengths 

and limitations to any approach, and they should be considered carefully with the help of 

your ESW. For example, the use of existing data sources may help reduce costs, maximize 

the use of existing information, and facilitate comparability with other programs, but may 

not provide program specificity. Additionally, existing sources of data may not meet the 

question-method appropriateness criteria.

It is beyond the scope of this workbook to discuss in detail the complexities of what 

appropriate method(s) or data sources to choose. It is important to remember that not 

all methods fit all evaluation questions and often a mixed-methods approach is the best 

option for a comprehensive answer to a particular evaluation question. This is often where 

you need to consult with your evaluation experts for direction on matching method to 

question. More information can be found through the resources listed in Part II. Note that 

all data collected needs to have a clear link to the associated evaluation question and 

anticipated use to reduce unnecessary burden on the respondent and stakeholders. It is 

important to revisit data collection efforts over the course of a multi-year evaluation plan to 

examine utility against the burden on respondents and stakeholders. Finally, this word of 

caution—it is not enough to have defined measures. Quality assurance procedures must be 

put into place so that data is collected in a reliable way, coded and entered correctly, and 

checked for accuracy. A quality assurance plan should be included in your evaluation plan.
27

1 2 3 5 6 4

Roles and Responsibilities

Writing an evaluation plan will not ensure that the evaluation is implemented on time, as 

intended, or within budget. A critical piece of the evaluation plan is to identify the roles and 

responsibilities of program staff, evaluation staff, contractors, and stakeholders from the 

beginning of the planning process. This information should be kept up to date throughout 

the implementation of the evaluation. Stakeholders must clearly understand their role in 

the evaluation implementation. Maintaining an involved, engaged network of stakeholders 

throughout the development and implementation of the plan will increase the likelihood that 

their participation serves the needs of the evaluation. An evaluation implementation work 

plan is as critical to the success of the evaluation as a program work plan is to the success 

of the program. This is even more salient when multiple organizations are involved and/or 

multiple evaluation activities occur simultaneously. 

Evaluation Plan Methods Grid

One tool that is particularly useful in your evaluation plan is an evaluation plan methods 

grid. Not only is this tool helpful to align evaluation questions with methods, indicators, 

performance measures, data sources, roles, and responsibilities but it can facilitate a 

shared understanding of the overall evaluation plan with stakeholders. The tool can take 

many forms and should be adapted to fit your specific evaluation and context.

Figure 4.1: Evaluation Plan Methods Grid Example 

Evaluation 

Question

Indicator/

Performance 

Measure

Method Data Source Frequency Responsibility

What process 

leads to 

implementation 

of policy?

Interview 

description of 

process steps, 

actions, and 

strategies

Case study, 

interviews, 

document 

reviews etc.

Site visits and 

reports

Pre and post 

funding period

Contractor 
28 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 5 6 4

Figure 4.2: Evaluation Plan Methods Grid Example 

Evaluation Question Indicators/ Performance 

Measure

Potential Data Source 

(Existing/New)

Comments

What media promotion 

activities are being 

implemented?

Description of promotional 

activities and their reach 

of targeted populations, 

dose, intensity

Focus group feedback

Target Rating Point and 

Gross Rating Point data 

sources

Enrollment data

Budget

The evaluation budget discussion was most likely initially started during Step 3 when the 

team was discussing the focus of the evaluation and feasibility issues. It is now time to 

develop a complete evaluation project budget based on the decisions made about the 

evaluation questions, methods, roles, and responsibilities of stakeholders. A complete 

budget is necessary to ensure that the evaluation project is fully funded and can deliver 

upon promises.

An Evaluation Plan Methods Grid exercise and more examples can be found in Part II, 

Section 4.1.

An Evaluation Budget exercise and more examples can be found in Part II, Section 4.2.
29

1 2 3 5 6 4

EVALUATION PLAN TIPS FOR STEP 4

 Select the best method(s) that answers the evaluation question. This can often 

involve a mixed-methods approach.

 Gather the evidence that is seen as credible by the primary users of the 

evaluation.

 Define implementation roles and responsibilities for program staff, evaluation 

staff, contractors, and stakeholders.

 Develop an evaluation plan methods grid to facilitate a shared understanding of 

the overall evaluation plan, and the timeline for evaluation activities.

EVALUATION TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STEP 4:

 4.1 Evaluation Plan Methods Grid Exercise

 4.2 Evaluation Budget Exercise

AT THIS POINT IN YOUR PLAN, YOU HAVE—

 identified the primary users of the evaluation,

 created the evaluation stakeholder workgroup,

 defined the purposes of the evaluation,

 described the program, including context,

 created a shared understanding of the program,

 identified the stage of development of the program,

 prioritized evaluation questions and discussed feasibility 

issues,

 discussed issues related to credibility of data sources,

 identified indicators and/or performance measures linked to 

chosen evaluation questions,

 determined implementation roles and responsibilities 

for program staff, evaluation staff, contractors, and 

stakeholders, and

 developed an evaluation plan methods grid.
30 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 6 5

Step 5: Planning for Conclusions

Justifying conclusions includes analyzing the information you collect, interpreting, and 

drawing conclusions from your data. This step is needed to turn the data collected into 

meaningful, useful, and accessible information. This is often when programs incorrectly 

assume they no longer need the ESW integrally involved in decision making and instead 

look to the “experts” to complete the analyses and interpretation. However, engaging the 

ESW in this step is critical to ensuring the meaningfulness, credibility, and acceptance of 

evaluation findings and conclusions. Actively meeting with stakeholders and discussing 

preliminary findings helps to guide the interpretation phase. In fact, stakeholders often have 

novel insights or perspectives to guide interpretation that evaluation staff may not have, 

leading to more thoughtful conclusions. 

Planning for analysis and interpretation is directly tied to the timetable begun in Step 4. 

Errors or omissions in planning this step can create serious delays in the final evaluation 

report and may result in missed opportunities if the report has been timed to correspond 

with significant events. Often, groups fail to appreciate the resources, time, and expertise 

required to clean and analyze data. This applies to both qualitative and quantitative data. 

Some programs focus their efforts on collecting data, but never fully appreciate the 

time it takes to work with the data to prepare for analysis, interpretation, feedback, and 

conclusions. These programs are suffering from “D.R.I.P.”, that is, programs that are “Data 

Rich but Information Poor.” Survey data remains “in boxes” or interviews are never fully 

explored for theme identification.

After planning for the analysis of the data, you have to prepare to examine the results 

to determine what the data actually say about your program. These results should be 

interpreted with the goals of your program in mind, the social/political context of the 

program, and the needs of the stakeholders.

Moreover, it is critical that your plans include time for interpretation and review by 

stakeholders to increase transparency and validity of your process and conclusions. 

The emphasis here is on justifying conclusions, not just analyzing data. This is a step 

that deserves due diligence in the planning process. The propriety standard plays a role 

in guiding the evaluator’s decisions on how to analyze and interpret data to assure that 

all stakeholder values are respected in the process of drawing conclusions (Program 

Evaluation Standards, 1994). That is to say, who needs to be involved in the evaluation for 

it to be ethical. This may include one or more stakeholder interpretation meetings to review 

interim data and further refine conclusions. A note of caution, as a stakeholder driven 

process, there is often pressure to reach beyond the evidence when drawing conclusions. 
31

1 2 3 4 6 5

It is the responsibility of the evaluator and the ESW to ensure that conclusions are drawn 

directly from the evidence. This is a topic that should be discussed with the ESW in the 

planning stages along with reliability and validity issues and possible sources of biases. 

If possible and appropriate, triangulation of data should be considered and remedies to 

threats to the credibility of the data should be addressed as early as possible.

A Stakeholder Interpretation Meeting exercise is found in Part II, Section 5.1.

EVALUATION PLAN TIPS FOR STEP 5

 The planning for conclusions step is needed to turn the data collected into 

meaningful, useful, and accessible information for action.

 Including your stakeholder group in this step is directly tied to the previous 

discussion on credibility and acceptance of data and conclusions. 

 Errors in planning in this step can create serious delays in the final evaluation 

report and may result in missed opportunities if the report has been timed to 

correspond to significant events. 

 It is critical that your plans include time for interpretation and review from 

stakeholders (including your critics) to increase transparency and validity of your 

process and conclusions.

EVALUATION TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STEP 5:

 5.1 Stakeholder Interpretation Meeting Exercise

 Western Michigan University, The Evaluation Center at 

http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/
32 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 6 5

AT THIS POINT IN YOUR PLAN, YOU HAVE—

 identified the primary users of the evaluation,

 created the evaluation stakeholder workgroup,

 defined the purposes of the evaluation,

 described the program, including context,

 created a shared understanding of the program,

 identified the stage of development of the program,

 prioritized evaluation questions and discussed feasibility issues,

 discussed issues related to credibility of data sources,

 identified indicators and/or performance measures linked to 

chosen evaluation questions,

 determined implementation roles and responsibilities for 

program staff, evaluation staff, contractors, and stakeholders,

 developed an evaluation plan methods grid,

 addressed possible threats to the credibility of your data, and

 developed a timetable that includes cleaning and analyzing 

data as well as stakeholder interpretation sessions.
33

1 2 3 4 5 6

Step 6: Planning for Dissemination and Sharing of Lessons 

Learned

Another often overlooked step in the planning stage is Step 6, planning for use of 

evaluation results, sharing of lessons learned, communication, and dissemination of results. 

It is often felt that this step will just take care of itself once the report is published. In reality, 

planning for use begins with Step 1 and the consideration of stakeholder involvement. 

Evaluation use is likely when end use is planned for and built into the six steps in your 

evaluation plan. Planning for use is directly tied to the identified purposes of the evaluation 

and program and stakeholder priorities. Your decision to 

include the ESW throughout the plan development stage 

begins the process of building a market for your evaluation 

results and increases the chances that results will be 

used for program improvement and decision making. Use 

of evaluation is most likely to occur when evaluation is 

collaborative and participatory, a process that begins in 

the planning phase. This step is directly tied to the utility standard in evaluation. Is it ethical 

to consume program and stakeholder resources if evaluation results are never used? The 

resources expended and the information gained from evaluations are too important to just 

hope that evaluation results will be used. Use must be planned for, nurtured, and included 

in the evaluation plan from the very beginning.

Based on the uses for your evaluation, you will need to determine who should learn 

about the findings and how they should learn the information. Typically, this is where the 

final report is published, and most assume the evaluation is done. However, if personal 

ownership of evaluation results is inserted here, such as through collaboration with an 

ESW, the impact and value of the evaluation results will increase (Patton, 2008). The 

program and the ESW take personal responsibility for getting the results to the right 

people and in a usable, targeted format. This absolutely must be planned for and included 

in the evaluation plan. It will be important to consider the audience in terms of timing, 

style, tone, message source, method and format. Remember that stakeholders will not 

suddenly become interested in your product just because you produced a report. You must 

sufficiently prepare the market for the product and for use of the evaluation results (Patton, 

2008). Writing a straightforward and comprehensive evaluation report can help insure use. 

Use must be planned for, 

cultivated, and included in the 

evaluation plan from the very 

beginning
34 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Communication and Dissemination Plans

Your evaluation results may not reach the intended audience with the intended impact just 

because they are published. An intentional communication and dissemination approach 

should be included in your evaluation plan. As previously stated, the planning stage is 

the time for the program and the ESW to begin to think about the best way to share the 

lessons you will learn from the evaluation. The communication-dissemination phase of 

the evaluation is a two-way process designed to support use of the evaluation results for 

program improvement and decision making. In order to achieve this outcome, a program 

must translate evaluation results into practical applications and must systematically 

distribute the information through a variety of audience-specific strategies. In order to be 

effective, dissemination systems need to—

 orient toward the needs of the user, incorporating the types and levels of

information needed into the forms and language preferred by the user,

use varied dissemination methods, including written information, electronic media, 

and person-to-person contact,

include both proactive and reactive dissemination channels—that is, incorporate 

information that users have identified as important and information that users may 

not know to request but that they are likely to need,

establish clear channels for users to make their needs and priorities known to the 

disseminating agency,

recognize and provide for the “natural flow” of the four levels of dissemination 

that have been identified as leading to utilization: spread, exchange, choice, and 

implementation,

draw upon existing resources, relationships, and networks to the maximum extent 

possible while building new resources as needed by users,

include effective quality control mechanisms to assure that information included is 

accurate, relevant, and representative,

incorporate sufficient information so that the user can determine the basic principles 

underlying specific practices and the settings in which these practices may be used 

most productively, and

establish linkages to resources that may be needed to implement the information— 

usually referred to as technical assistance.

(National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, 2001)
335

1 2 3 4 5 6

The first step in writing an effective communications plan is to define your communication 

goals and objectives. Given that the communication objectives will be tailored to each 

target audience, you need to consider with your ESW who the primary audience(s) are (e.g., 

the funding agency, the general public, or some other group). Some questions to ask about 

the potential audience(s) are the following:

 Who is a priority

What do they already know about the topic? 

What is critical for them to know?

Where do they prefer to receive their information? 

What is their preferred format? 

What language level is appropriate?

Within what time frame are evaluation updates and reports necessary? 

Once the goals, objectives, and target audiences of the communication plan are established, 

you should consider the best way to reach the intended audience by considering which 

communication/dissemination tools will best serve your goals and objectives. Will the 

program use newsletters/fact sheets, oral presentations, visual displays, videos, storytelling, 

and/or press releases? Carefully consider the best tools to use by getting feedback from 

your ESW, by learning from others’ experiences, and by reaching out to target audiences 

to gather their preferences. An excellent resource to facilitate creative techniques for 

reporting evaluation results is Torres, Preskill, and Pionteck’s (2004) Evaluation Strategies for 

Communicating and Reporting.

Complete the communication planning step by establishing a timetable for sharing 

evaluation findings and lessons learned. Figure 5 can be useful in helping the program to 

chart the written communications plan:
36 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

6

Figure 5: Communication Plan Table 

Target Audience 

(Priority)

Goals Tools Timetable

Program Implementation 

Team

Inform them in real time 

about what’s working well 

and what needs to be 

quickly adjusted during 

implementation

Monthly meetings and 

briefing documents

Monthly

Program Stakeholders Promote program progress Success stories Annually

Funding Decision Makers Continue and/or enhance 

program funding

Executive summary; 

Targeted program briefs

Within 90 days of 

conclusion of funding

It is important to note that you do not have to wait until the final evaluation report is written 

in order to share your evaluation results. A system for sharing interim results to facilitate 

program course corrections and decision making should be included in your evaluation 

plan. Additionally, success stories that focus on upstream, midstream, and downstream 

successes can facilitate program growth and visibility. A success story can show 

movement in your program’s progress over time and demonstrate its value and impact. It 

can serve as a vehicle for engaging potential participants, partners, and funders especially 

when it takes time for a program to mature to long-term outcomes (Lavinghouze, Price, 

Smith, 2007).

The Communicating Results exercise can be found in Part II, Section 6.2 and can 

assist you with tracking your audiences and ways to reach them. More information on 

developing a communication and dissemination plan can be found in the Resource 

Section in Part II of this workbook.

1 2 3 4 5
337

1 2 3 4 5 6

Ensuring Use

Communicating results is not enough to ensure use of evaluation results and lessons 

learned. The evaluation team and program staff needs to proactively take action to 

encourage use and wide dissemination of the information gleaned through the evaluation 

project. It is helpful to strategize with stakeholders early in the evaluation process about 

how your program will ensure that findings are used to support program improvement 

efforts and inform decision making. Program staff and the ESW must take personal 

responsibility for guaranteeing the dissemination of and application of evaluation results.

There are several practical steps you can include in your evaluation plan to help ensure 

evaluation findings are used. These steps might contain plans to—

 conduct regularly scheduled meetings with evaluation stakeholders as a forum

for sharing evaluation findings in real time and developing recommendations for 

program improvement based on evaluation findings, 

review evaluation findings and recommendations in regularly scheduled staff 

meetings,

engage stakeholders in identifying ways they can apply evaluation findings to 

improve their programs, 

coordinate, document, and monitor efforts program staff and partners are making to 

implement improvement recommendations, and

develop multiple, tailored evaluation reports to address specific stakeholders 

information needs.

One Last Note

The impact of the evaluation results can reach far beyond the evaluation report. If 

stakeholders are involved throughout the process, communication and participation may be 

enhanced. If an effective feedback loop is in place, program improvement and outcomes 

may be improved. If a strong commitment to sharing lessons learned and success stories 

is in place, then other programs may benefit from the information gleaned through the 

evaluation process. Changes in thinking, understanding, program, and organization may 

stem from thoughtful evaluative processes (Patton, 2008). Use of evaluation results and 

impacts beyond the formal findings of the evaluation report start with the planning process 

and the transparent evaluation plan.
38 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

6

EVALUATION PLAN TIPS FOR STEP 6

 Planning for use begins with Step 1 and the consideration of stakeholder 

involvement.

 Evaluation use is likeliest when end use is planned for and built into the six steps 

in your evaluation plan. 

 Use of evaluation is most likely to occur when evaluation is collaborative and 

participatory, a process that begins in the planning phase.

 An intentional communication and dissemination plan should be included in your 

evaluation plan. 

 The planning stage is the time for the program to begin to think about the best 

way to share the lessons you will learn from the evaluation.

 In addition to your final report, you will want to tailor reports to highlight specific 

findings for selected groups of stakeholders. Consider the audience in terms 

of timing, style, tone, message source, method, and format. Planning for these 

reports begins with your evaluation plan.

EVALUATION TOOLS AND RESOURCES FOR STEP 6:

 6.1 Reporting Checklist Exercise

 6.2 Communicating Results Exercise

 Western Michigan University, The Evaluation Center at 

http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists

1 2 3 4 5
339

1 2 3 4 5 6

AT THIS POINT IN YOUR PLAN, YOU HAVE—

 identified the primary users of the evaluation,

 created the evaluation stakeholder workgroup,

 defined the purposes of the evaluation,

 described the program, including context,

 created a shared understanding of the program,

 identified the stage of development of the program,

 prioritized evaluation questions and discussed feasibility issues,

 discussed issues related to credibility of data sources,

 identified indicators and/or performance measures linked to 

chosen evaluation questions,

 determined implementation roles and responsibilities 

for program staff, evaluation staff, contractors, and 

stakeholders,

 developed a work plan methods grid,

 addressed possible threats to the credibility of your data,

 developed a timetable that includes cleaning and analyzing 

data as well as stakeholder interpretation sessions,

 developed an intentional, strategic communications and 

dissemination plan, and

 planned for various audience-specific evaluation reports, 

presentations, and publications.
40 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

PULLING IT ALL TOGETHER

Thus far we have walked through the six steps of the CDC Framework for Program 

Evaluation in Public Health to facilitate programs and their evaluation workgroups as 

they think through the process of planning evaluation activities. We have described the 

components of an evaluation plan and details to consider while developing the plan in the 

context of the CDC Framework. In this section, we briefly recap information that you should 

consider when developing your evaluation plan.

Increasingly, a multi-year evaluation plan is required as part of applications for funding 

or as part of program work plans. An evaluation plan is more than a column added to 

the program work plan for indicators. These plans should be based on stated program 

objectives and include activities to assess progress on those objectives. Plans should 

include both process and outcome evaluation activities. 

As previously discussed, an evaluation plan is a written document that describes how you 

will monitor and evaluate your program, so that you will be able to describe the “What,” 

the “How,” and the “Why It Matters” for your program. The “What” reflects the description 

and accomplishments of your program. Your plan serves to clarify the program’s purpose, 

anticipated expectations, and outcomes. The “How” answers the question, “How did you do 

it?” and assesses how a program is being implemented and if the program is operating with 

fidelity to the program protocol. Additionally, the “How” answers program course-corrections 

that should be made during implementation. The “Why It Matters” represents how your 

program makes a difference and the impact is has on the public health issue being addressed. 

Being able to demonstrate that your program has made a difference can be critical to program 

sustainability. An evaluation plan is similar to a program work plan in that it is a roadmap 

and is used to guide the planning of activities used to assess the processes and outcomes 

of a program. An effective evaluation plan is a dynamic tool that can change over time, as 

needed, to reflect program changes and priorities. An evaluation plan creates directions for 

accomplishing program goals and objectives by linking evaluation and program planning.

Ideally, program staff, evaluation staff, and the ESW will 

be developing the evaluation plan while the program 

is developing the program work plan. Developing the 

evaluation plan simultaneously with the program work 

plan allows program staff and stakeholders to realistically 

think through the process and resources needed for the 

evaluation. It facilitates the link between program planning and evaluation and ensures creating 

a feedback loop of evaluation information for program improvement and decision making.

Ideally, program staff and the 

ESW will develop the evaluation 

plan while developing the 

program work plan.
41

Often, programs have multiple funding sources and thus may have multiple evaluation 

plans. Ideally, your program will develop one overarching evaluation plan that consolidates 

all activities and provides an integrated view of program assessment. Then, as additional 

funding sources are sought and activities added, those evaluation activities can be 

enfolded into the larger logic model and evaluation scheme. 

The basic elements of an evaluation plan include:

 Title pag

Question overview

Intended use and users

Program description

Evaluation focus

Methods

Analysis and interpretation plan

Use, dissemination, and sharing plan

However, your plan should be adapted to your specific evaluation needs and context. 

Additionally, it is important to remember that your evaluation plan is a living, dynamic 

document designed to adapt to the complexities of the environment within which your 

programs are implemented. The plan is a guide to facilitate intentional decisions. If changes 

are made, they are documented and done intentionally with a fully informed ESW.

Title page: This page provides easily identifiable program name, dates covered, and 

possibly basic focus of the evaluation.

Question overview: In an evaluation plan, this is an overview of the evaluation questions 

for ease of reference, similar to the executive summary in a final evaluation report.

Intended use and users: This section fosters transparency about the purposes of the 

evaluation and who will have access to evaluation results. It is important to build a market 

for evaluation results from the beginning. This section identifies the primary intended users 

and the ESW and describes the purposes and intended uses of the evaluation.

Program description: This section provides a shared understanding of the description of 

your program and a basis for the evaluation questions and prioritization. This section will 

usually include a logic model and a description of the stage of development of the program 

in addition to a narrative description. This section can also facilitate completing the 

introduction section for a final report or publication from the evaluation. This section might 

also include a reference section or bibliography related to your program description.
42 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

Evaluation focus: There are never enough resources or time to answer every evaluation 

question. Prioritization must be collaboratively accomplished based on the logic model/

program description, the stage of development of the program, program and stakeholder 

priorities, intended uses of the evaluation, and feasibility issues. This section will clearly 

delineate the criteria for evaluation prioritization and will include a discussion of feasibility 

and efficiency.

Methods: This section covers indicators and performance measures, data sources and 

selection of appropriate methods, roles and responsibilities, and credibility of evaluation 

information. This section will include a discussion about appropriate methods to fit the 

evaluation question. An evaluation plan methods grid is a useful tool for transparency 

and planning.

Analysis and interpretation plan: Who will get to see interim results? Will there be a 

stakeholder interpretation meeting or meetings? It is critical that your plans allow time for 

interpretation and review from stakeholders (including your critics) to increase transparency 

and validity of your process and conclusions. The emphasis here is on justifying 

conclusions, not just analyzing data. This is a step that deserves due diligence in the 

planning process. The propriety standard plays a role in guiding the evaluator’s decisions 

in how to analyze and interpret data to assure that all stakeholder values are respected in 

the process of drawing conclusions. A timeline that transparently demonstrates inclusion of 

stakeholders facilitates acceptance of evaluation results and use of information.

Use, dissemination, and sharing plan: Plans for use of evaluation results, 

communications, and dissemination methods should be discussed from the beginning. This 

is a critical but often neglected section of the evaluation plan. A communication plan that 

displays target audience, goals, tools, and a timeline is helpful for this section.

The exercises, worksheets, and tools found in Part II of this workbook are to help you 

think through the concepts discussed in Part I. These are only examples. Remember, your 

evaluation plan(s) will vary based on program and stakeholder priorities and context.
43

REFERENCES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Comprehensive Cancer Control Branch 

Program Evaluation Toolkit. Atlanta (GA): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease 

Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, 2010 

[accessed 2011 Oct 19]. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Framework for Program Evaluation in Public 

Health. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 1999; 48(NoRR-11):1–40.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Introduction to Process Evaluation in Tobacco 

Use Prevention and Control. Atlanta (GA): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention 

and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2008 [accessed 2011 Oct 19]. 

Knowlton LW, Philips CC. The Logic Model Guidebook: Better Strategies for Great Results. 

Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, 2009.

Lavinghouze R, Price AW, Smith K-A. The Program Success Story: A Valuable Tool for 

Program Evaluation. Health Promotion Practice 2007; 8(4):323–331.

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research. Developing an Effective 

Dissemination Plan. Austin (TX): Southwest Educational Developmental Laboratory, 

2001[accessed 2011 Oct 24].

Patton MQ. Utilization-Focused Evaluation. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage 

Publications, 2008. 

Sandars JR, The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. The Program 

Evaluation Standards. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, 1994.

Torres R, Preskill H, Piontek ME. Evaluation Strategies for Communicating and Reporting. 

2nd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, 2004.

Western Michigan University. The Evaluation Center. Evaluation Checklists

[accessed 2011 Oct 19].

Worthen BR, Sanders JR, Fitzpatrick JL. Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and 

Practical Guidelines. 2nd ed. New York: Addison Wesley Logman, 1997.
44 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

Part II: Exercise, Worksheets, and Tools

Step 1: 1.1 Stakeholder Mapping Exercise...................................................................................... 45

Step 1: 1.2 Evaluation Purpose Exercise ......................................................................................... 50

Step 1: 1.3 Stakeholder Inclusion and Communication Plan Exercise.............................................. 53

Step 1: 1.4 Stakeholder Information Needs Exercise............................................................................ 55

Step 2: 2.1 Program Stage of Development Exercise ...................................................................... 57

Step 3: 3.1 Focus the Evaluation Exercise....................................................................................... 62

Step 4: 4.1 Evaluation Plan Methods Grid Exercise ......................................................................... 68

Step 4: 4.2 Evaluation Budget Exercise........................................................................................... 73

Step 5: 5.1 Stakeholder Interpretation Meeting Exercise................................................................. 76

Step 6: 6.1 Reporting Checklist Exercise ........................................................................................ 80

Tools and Templates: Checklist for Ensuring Effective Evaluation Reports........................................ 80

Step 6: 6.2 Communicating Results Exercise.................................................................................. 82

Outline: 7.1 Basic Elements of an Evaluation Plan........................................................................... 88

Outline: 7.2 Evaluation Plan Sketchpad........................................................................................... 88

Logic Model Examples.................................................................................................................... 98

OSH Logic Models Example ........................................................................................................ 98

Preventing Initiation of Tobacco Use Among Young People...................................................... 98

Eliminating Nonsmokers’ Exposure to Secondhand Smoke ..................................................... 99

Promoting Quitting Among Adults and Young People ............................................................ 100

DNPAO Logic Model Example.................................................................................................... 101

State NPAO Program—Detailed Logic Model ...................................................................... 101
1

STEP 1: 1.1 STAKEHOLDER MAPPING EXERCISE

It is suggested that the program enlist the aid of an evaluation stakeholder workgroup (ESW)

of 8 to 10 members that represents the stakeholders who have the greatest stake or 

vested interest in the evaluation.* These stakeholders/primary intended users will serve in 

a consultative role on all phases of the evaluation. To begin the process of selecting those 

members who will best represent your primary intended users, it is suggested that you 

make a list of all possible users with corresponding comments about their investment in the 

evaluation and potential uses for evaluation results.

Priority Person/Group Comments

*Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Introduction to Process Evaluation in Tobacco Use Prevention and Control. Atlanta (GA): 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease 

Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2008 [accessed 2011 Oct 19].

2 3 4 5 6

45
46 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Now, go back over your list of potential users of the evaluation results and consider their 

level of priority on the list. For example, providing the information that funders or decision 

makers need may take a higher priority over some clients even though the clients are still 

very important. You might rate stakeholders in terms of “high,” “medium,” or “low” or you 

might rank order them in numerical order (i.e. from “1” to “n”). The choice is yours.

Another method for determining priority users or stakeholders is to conduct a stakeholder 

mapping exercise such as the one that follows. For this activity, choose the characteristics 

that would be the most beneficial for your evaluation stakeholder group members to 

have related to their intended use of evaluation results. These characteristics would be 

the ones determined by the program’s staff to be of the most value to your program’s 

evaluation. Write the desired characteristics on the top (Characteristic X) and left-hand 

side (Characteristic Y) of a 4 x 4 table. Also write whether these characteristics are of high 

and low value to the program. Characteristics might include traits such as ability to use 

information, influence over program’s future, and direct investment in the program. The 

traits must be meaningful to the stated purposes of the evaluation.

Characteristic X

Characteristic X

High Low

High

Low
47

1

Consider each stakeholder relevant to the evaluation and his or her potential role in 

the evaluation. Rank the potential evaluation stakeholder as either high or low for each 

characteristic. Place the stakeholder in the cell that fits his or her importance level for each 

characteristic. 

Characteristic X

High Low

Characteristic X

High Stakeholder A, B, C, E, G, I, K, M Stakeholder D, F

Low Stakeholder H, J Stakeholder L, N

The stakeholders that fall into the high box for both characteristics X and Y would most 

likely be strong candidates to be invited to be a part of the 8 to 10 person ESW. As with 

any stakeholder group membership, potential participation would still include additional 

conversations by program staff.

2 3 4 5 6
48 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1

Priority Person/Group Comments

2 3 4 5 6
49

1

Characteristic X

High Low

Characteristic X

High

Low

2 3 4 5 6
50 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1

STEP 1: 1.2 EVALUATION PURPOSE EXERCISE

As important as identifying the end users and ESW is identifying the purpose of the 

evaluation. These two aspects of the evaluation serve as a foundation for evaluation planning, 

focus, design, and interpretation and use of results. The purpose of an evaluation influences 

the identification of stakeholders for the evaluation, selection of specific evaluation questions, 

and the timing of evaluation activities. It is critical that the program is transparent about 

intended purposes of the evaluation. If evaluation results will be used to determine whether a 

program should be continued or eliminated, stakeholders should know this up front.

In order to determine the evaluation purpose, the evaluation team should work with 

those who are requesting the evaluation to identify the possible multiple purposes for the 

evaluation from multiple sources. The first task is to consider what groups are interested in 

an evaluation of the program. This might include the program staff, health department staff, 

funders, state level decision makers, and other stakeholders. The second task would be to 

align the specific group with what they are requesting to be evaluated. The next task would 

be to ascertain what the potential uses of the evaluation results will be by each group 

interested in the evaluation. And fourth, the team should develop a purpose statement 

relevant to each group and evaluation requested.

Group Interested 

in an Evaluation

What Is to Be 

Evaluated

How Will the 

Results Be Used

Evaluation Purpose 

Statement

2 3 4 5 6
51

1

Next, the team should consider each purpose statement for duplication and overlap. What 

statements could be combined? The final step in the process is to merge the statements 

into one overall purpose statement.

Evaluation Purpose Statement:

2 3 4 5 6
52 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1

Group Interested 

in an Evaluation

What Is to Be 

Evaluated

How Will the 

Results Be Used

Evaluation Purpose 

Statement

2 3 4 5 6
53

1

STEP 1: 1.3 STAKEHOLDER INCLUSION AND 

COMMUNICATION PLAN EXERCISE

It is important to explore agendas at the beginning of the evaluation and come to a shared 

understanding of roles and responsibilities as well as the purposes of the evaluation. Some 

stakeholders will be represented on the ESW and some will not. It is important to include 

a clear communication plan in your evaluation plan in order to meaningfully engage all 

appropriate stakeholders and increase participation and buy-in for the evaluation as well as 

use of final results.

List the appropriate role for each stakeholder relevant to the evaluation and how and when 

you might engage him or her in the evaluation. It is important to consider a stakeholder’s 

expertise, level of interest, and availability when developing the communication plan. If there 

are specific deadlines for information such as a community vote or funding opportunity, it is 

important to note those as well. Additional columns could be added for comments.

Evaluation 

Stakeholder

Role Related to 

the Evaluation

Mode of 

Communication

Timing of 

Communication

A note on roles: Stakeholders need not be a member of the ESW in order to have a role 

related to the evaluation. Given a stakeholder’s specific expertise, interest, availability, or 

intended use of the evaluation results, he or she may be involved in part or all of the evaluation 

without being a specific member of the ESW. Roles might include but are not limited to:

 Development of the evaluation pla

Feedback on focusing the evaluation

Needing information about specific evaluation activities or progress of the evaluation

Facilitating implementation of specific aspects of the evaluation

Participation in interpretation meetings

Disseminating and promoting use of evaluation results

2 3 4 5 6
54 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1

Evaluation 

Stakeholder

Role Related to 

the Evaluation

Mode of 

Communication

Timing of 

Communication

2 3 4 5 6
55

1

STEP 1: 1.4 STAKEHOLDER INFORMATION NEEDS EXERCISE

While focusing the evaluation occurs in Step 3, the groundwork begins with the identification 

of stakeholders relevant to the evaluation or the primary intended users. The ESW 

membership is designed to reflect the priority information needs of those members who 

will use the evaluation information. However, it is not always possible to include some high 

information need groups, and it is certainly not possible to include representation from every 

group that would benefit from evaluation results. This should not prevent evaluation staff and 

the ESW from considering all points of view and needs for information when considering how 

best to focus the evaluation. Therefore, determining stakeholder information needs is both 

useful for considering membership in the ESW (Step 1) and focusing the evaluation (Step 3).

From your list of primary intended users (those who have a stake in the evaluation results), 

identify what information each stakeholder will use.

Primary Intended User (Stakeholder) Evaluation Information Needed

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

2 3 4 5 6
56 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1

Primary Intended User (Stakeholder) Evaluation Information Needed

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

2 3 4 5 6
57

1 2

STEP 2: 2.1 PROGRAM STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT 

EXERCISE

Another activity that will be needed to fully describe your program and prepare you to focus 

your evaluation (Step 3) is an accurate assessment of the stage of development of the 

program. The developmental stages that programs typically move through are planning, 

implementation, and maintenance. It is essential to identify the appropriate stage of 

development in preparation for focusing the evaluation because some evaluation questions 

cannot be answered until a program reaches a specific stage of maturation. Stakeholders 

need to be aware of what the evaluation can and cannot promise. Additionally, preparation 

for future and sometimes complex evaluations needs to occur in early stages of 

development for the evaluation to be fully successful. 

The stage of development conceptual model is complementary with the logic model. Figure 

3.1 shows how general program evaluation questions are distinguished by both logic model 

categories and the developmental stage of the program. This places evaluation within the 

appropriate stage of program development (planning, implementation, and maintenance). 

The model offers suggested starting points for asking evaluation questions within the logic 

model while respecting the developmental stage of the program. This will prepare the 

program and the ESW to focus the evaluation appropriately based on program maturity and 

priorities. 

Figure 3.1: Stage of Development by Logic Model Category

Developmental Stage Program 

Planning

Program 

Implementation

Program 

Maintenance

Logic Model Category Inputs and Activities Outputs and Short-term 

Outcomes

Intermediate and 

Long-term Outcomes

To determine what stage of development your program is currently in, staff and 

stakeholders should have a conversation about program maturation with the logic model 

in hand. It is important to note that when a program is reinventing itself or revitalization is 

occurring, the program may resemble the left-hand side of the logic model and thus the 

program planning stage even when it has been in existence for numerous years.

3 4 5 6
58 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Describe your program’s maturation:

Activities/Tasks 

That Have 

Been Completed

Activities/Tasks 

Working on:

Activities/Tasks 

Not Yet Begun

Progress Achieved on 

Outputs or Outcomes 

(Indicate if Short, 

Intermediate, or 

Long Term)

Based on your description and consideration of the logic model, your program is in what 

stage of development?

Here is the example of developmental stages from the workbook:

Figure 3.2: Stage of Development by Logic Model Category Example

Developmental Stage Program 

Planning

Program 

Implementation

Program 

Maintenance

Example: 

Developmental 

Stages When 

Passing a Policy

Assess environment 

and assets

Develop policy

The policy has not 

yet been passed

The policy has been 

passed but not 

implemented

The policy has been 

in effect for 

less than 1 year

The policy has been 

in effect for 

1 year or longer

Example: 

Questions Based 

on Developmental 

Stage When 

Passing a Policy

Is there public support 

for the policy?

What resources 

will be needed 

for implementation 

of the policy?

Is there compliance 

with the policy?

Is there continued 

or increased public 

support for the policy?

Are there major 

exemptions or loopholes 

to the policy?

What is the 

health impact 

of the policy?
59

1 2

Using the Stakeholder Information Needs chart you prepared in Exercise 1.4, consider 

the information needed in relation to timing across the logic model. Indicate on this chart 

what stage of development the program will be in given the nature of the evaluation 

question asked.

Primary Intended User Evaluation Information Needed Program Stage of Development

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

What evaluation questions are outside of the current stage of development of your 

program? What implications does this have for your current evaluation? What implications 

does this have for planning for future evaluations?

3 4 5 6
60 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Activities/Tasks 

That Have 

Been Completed

Activities/Tasks 

Working on:

Activities/Tasks 

Not Yet Begun

Progress Achieved on 

Outputs or Outcomes 

(Indicate if Short, 

Intermediate, or 

Long Term)

Based on your description and consideration of the logic model, your program is in what 

stage of development?
61

1 2

Primary Intended User Evaluation Information Needed Program Stage of Development

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

3 4 5 6
62 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

STEP 3: 3.1 FOCUS THE EVALUATION EXERCISE

The amount of information you can gather concerning your program is potentially 

limitless. Evaluations, however, are always limited by the number of questions that can 

be realistically asked, the methods that can actually be employed, the feasibility of data 

collection, and the available resources. Therefore, the issue at the heart of Step 3 in the 

CDC framework is focusing the evaluation. The scope and depth of any program evaluation 

is dependent on program and stakeholder priorities, available resources, including 

financial resources, staff and contractor availability, and amount of time committed to 

the evaluation. The program should work together with the ESW to determine the priority 

of these questions, the feasibility of answering the questions, and identifying the uses of 

results before designing the evaluation plan. 

In this exercise, you will need to consider all the information from previous exercises in 

Step 1 through Step 2, the logic model, and your stakeholders’ vested interest in the 

evaluation. 

From the Stakeholder Mapping exercise, list the stakeholders included in the high-high or 

priority category for information needs:

Stakeholders in High-high or Priority Category for Importance and Information Needs 
63

1 2 3 4 5 6

From the Evaluation Purpose Identification exercise, indicate your overall evaluation 

purpose statement:

Evaluation Purpose Statement:

From the Stage of Development exercise, consider each stakeholder’s evaluation in relation 

to the stage of development the program most appropriate for answering that question:

Primary Intended User Evaluation Information Needed Program Stage of Development

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.
64 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Indicate your program’s current stage of development:

Based on your description and consideration of the logic model, your program is in what stage of 

development?

Given the overall purpose statement and the stage of development of the program, what 

questions from the high-high stakeholder group are viable for the current evaluation effort?

Evaluation Purpose Statement:

Stage of Development of Program:

High-high Category Stakeholders Evaluation Question

Next, the team should consider issues of feasibility related to those evaluation questions 

that are viable options given the current program stage of development and the evaluation 

purpose.
65

1 2 3 4 5 6

Evaluation 

Question

Methods 

That Might Be 

Used to Answer 

the Question

Assumptions or 

Conditions for 

This Method to 

Be Viable 

Resources 

Needed to 

Implement 

This Method

Limitations of 

This Method

No chart, grid, or exercise can fully answer the question of how best to focus the 

evaluation. However, the above information should facilitate informed discussions and can 

help avoid evaluation activities that are misaligned with the program stage of development, 

underfunded, or not of the highest priority for information needs. Additional considerations 

that might help you prioritize your evaluation questions include:

 The questions most important to you and your key stakeholders (the “must answer”

questions) 

Questions that provide results that you can use (e.g., for improvement)

Questions you can answer fully with available or easy to gather data

Questions within your resources to answer

The evaluation questions for the current evaluation are:
66 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Evaluation Purpose Statement:

Stage of Development of Program:

High-high Category Stakeholders Evaluation Question
67

1 2 3 4 5 6

Evaluation 

Question

Methods 

That Might Be 

Used to Answer 

the Question

Assumptions or 

Conditions for 

This Method to 

Be Viable 

Resources 

Needed to 

Implement 

This Method

Limitations of 

This Method
68 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

STEP 4: 4.1 EVALUATION PLAN METHODS GRID EXERCISE

One tool that is particularly useful in your evaluation plan is an evaluation plan methods 

grid. Not only is this tool helpful to align evaluation questions with indicators/performance 

measures and data sources and roles and responsibilities but it can facilitate advocating 

for resources for the evaluation. Additionally, this tool facilitates a shared understanding of 

the overall evaluation plan with stakeholders. This tool can take many forms and should be 

adapted to fit your specific evaluation and context.

Figure 4.1: Evaluation Plan Methods Grid Example 

Evaluation 

Question

Indicator/ 

Performance 

Measure

Method Data Source Frequency Responsibility

What process 

leads to 

implementation 

of policy?

N/A Case study Site visits and 

reports

Pre and post 

funding period

Contractor to be 

determined

Figure 4.2: Evaluation Plan Methods Grid Example 

Evaluation Question Indicators/ 

Performance Measure

Potential Data Source 

(Existing/New)

Comments

What media promotion 

activities are being 

implemented?

Description of 

promotional activities and 

their reach of targeted 

populations, dose, 

intensity

Focus group feedback

Target Rating Point and 

Gross Rating Point data 

sources

Choose the grid that is most appropriate for your program and complete it given your 

chosen evaluation questions from Step 3.
69

1 2 3 4 5 6

The evaluation questions for the current evaluation are:

Evaluation 

Question

Indicator/ 

Performance 

Measure

Method Data Source Frequency Responsibility

Evaluation Question Indicator/ Performance 

Measure

Potential Data Source

(Existing/New)

Comments
70 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Additional possible evaluation plan data grids might look like:

Evaluation 

Question

Timeline Methods Data Sources Instruments

Needed

Staff/Persons

Responsible

Evaluation 

Question

Methods Instruments

Needed

Timeline Respondents/

Population

Sample

Responsibility

Evaluation 

Question

Indicators Data

Collection

Sources

Data

Collection

Methods

Timeline Data Analysis

Plan
71

1 2 3 4 5 6

Evaluation 

Question

Indicator/ 

Performance 

Measure

Method Data Source Frequency Responsibility
72 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Evaluation Question Indicator/ Performance 

Measure

Potential Data Source

(Existing/New)

Comments
73

1 2 3 4 5 6

STEP 4: 4.2 EVALUATION BUDGET EXERCISE

For this exercise, you will need the work plan data grid you completed earlier in Step 4. 

For this exercise, we have used one as an example, but you should use the one you have 

chosen as most appropriate for your program.

Evaluation 

Question

Indicator/ 

Performance 

Measure

Method Data Source Frequency Responsibility

The team should consider roles and responsibilities, what services might be in kind and what 

activities will cost additional money. Will you need to pay for additional questions on existing 

surveys or can you use items that already exist? Are there existing data sources or will you 

need to create new ones? Do not forget items such as copying costs for surveys or Web 

services or technology needed in the field, such as recorders or mobile data collection devices.
74 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Evaluation 

Question

Indicator/ 

Performance 

Measure

Method Data 

Source

Frequency Responsibility Cost

Considerations

Don’t be surprised if during this exercise you have to revisit Step 3 or earlier portions 

of Step 4. Often the budget available doesn’t match the evaluation desired. Either the 

evaluation scope will need to be reduced or additional resources obtained. It is better to 

thoroughly consider this now before implementation begins than have to change course 

mid-implementation cycle.
75

1 2 3 4 5 6

Evaluation 

Question

Indicator/ 

Performance 

Measure

Method Data 

Source

Frequency Responsibility Cost

Considerations
76 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

STEP 5: 5.1 STAKEHOLDER INTERPRETATION MEETING 

EXERCISE

Justifying conclusions includes analyzing the information you collect, interpreting what the 

data mean, and drawing conclusions based on the data. This step is needed to turn the 

data collected into meaningful, useful, and accessible information. This is often the step in 

which programs incorrectly assume they no longer need the stakeholder workgroup and 

that this step is better left to the “experts.” However, including your stakeholder group in 

this step is directly tied to the previous discussion on credibility and acceptance of data 

and conclusions. 

Moreover, it is critical that your plans allow time for interpretation and review from 

stakeholders (including your critics) to increase transparency and validity of your process 

and conclusions. The emphasis here is on justifying conclusions not just analyzing data. 

This is a step that deserves due diligence in the planning process. The propriety standard 

plays a role in guiding the evaluator’s decisions on how to analyze and interpret data to 

assure that all stakeholder values are respected in the process of drawing conclusions.* 

This may include one or more stakeholder interpretation meetings to review interim data 

and further refine conclusions. A note of caution, as a stakeholder-driven process, there 

is often pressure to reach beyond the evidence when drawing conclusions. It is the 

responsibility of the evaluator and the evaluation workgroup to ensure that conclusions are 

drawn directly from the evidence. 

*Sandars JR, The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. The Program Evaluation Standards. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks 

(CA): Sage Publications, 1994.
77

1 2 3 4 5 6

A variety of activities can be included in your evaluation plan to solicit stakeholder input 

and facilitate interpretation of evaluation data. An example is provided below:

Interpretation and Review Activities Timeline

Individual site evaluation reports and feedback Within 1 month of site visit 

Check-in with ESW and/or participants Within 3 months of site visit or as appropriate during 

analysis phase

Grantee interpretation meeting Immediately following preparation of preliminary 

results

Stakeholder interpretation meeting Within 3 months following the grantee interpretation 

meeting

Stakeholder review of draft final report Within 3 months following the stakeholder 

interpretation meeting

Clearance and review process of final report Within 2 months following stakeholder review of 

draft final report

Complete an outline of proposed activities appropriate to your evaluation project to include 

opportunities for stakeholder interpretation and feedback:

Interpretation and Review Activities Timeline
78 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

It is important to consider the time it takes to solicit and incorporate stakeholder feedback 

in your evaluation project timeline. At this time, you should revisit your budget and timeline 

created earlier to ensure adequate time and funding for the stakeholder inclusion process.

In order to make sure your stakeholder interpretation meeting is a success, plan for 

steps to help things run smoothly. Time for these activities needs to be included in your 

evaluation timeline.

 Send the initial invitation at least 2 months in advance so that stakeholders can plan

for the meeting. Remind stakeholders of the overall evaluation purpose and questions.

Send the preliminary report or PowerPoint presentation within 2 weeks of the initial 

invitation to allow stakeholders time to review. It is important to remind stakeholders 

that results are a draft and should not be shared outside of the review group.

Send reminders about the meeting 1 or 2 weeks prior to the date. Identify any preexisting documentation that may be useful for understanding context.

Plan for appropriate technology (and backup) needed such as recorders, laptop, 

and screen, flipcharts.

If feasible, use a professional meeting facilitator.

A checklist to facilitate the development of a formal stakeholder interpretation meeting can 

be found at http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/checklist_topics/.
79

1 2 3 4 5 6

Interpretation and Review Activities Timeline
80 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

STEP 6: 6.1 REPORTING CHECKLIST EXERCISE

It may be helpful to include a draft table of contents and outline for sections of the final 

report in the evaluation plan. Additionally, the team could discuss preliminary ideas for 

tailored evaluation reporting and include these ideas in the dissemination plan. Below is 

a checklist of items that may be worth discussing during the evaluation planning stage 

to ensure adequate time and resources are devoted to the implementation and reporting 

process.

Tools and Templates: Checklist for Ensuring Effective Evaluation 

Reports*

 Provide interim and final reports to intended users in time for use

Tailor the report content, format, and style for the audiences by involving audience 

members.

Include an executive summary.

Summarize the description of the stakeholders and how they were engaged.

Describe essential features of the program (e.g., in appendices).

Explain the focus of the evaluation and its limitations.

Include an adequate summary of the evaluation plan and procedures.

Provide all necessary technical information (e.g., in appendices).

Specify the standards and criteria for evaluative judgments.

Explain the evaluative judgments and how they are supported by the evidence.

List both strengths and weaknesses of the evaluation.

Discuss recommendations for action with their advantages, disadvantages, and 

resource implications.

Ensure protections for program clients and other stakeholders.

Anticipate how people or organizations might be affected by the findings.

Present minority opinions or rejoinders where necessary.

Verify that the report is accurate and unbiased.

Organize the report logically and include appropriate details.

Remove technical jargon.

Use examples, illustrations, graphics, and stories.
81

1 2 3 4 5 6

*Adapted from Worthen BR, Sanders JR, Fitzpatrick JL. Program Evaluation: Alternative 

Approaches and Practical Guidelines. 2nd ed. New York: Addison Wesley Logman, 1997; 

presented in Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Comprehensive Cancer Control 

Branch Program Evaluation Toolkit. Atlanta (GA): U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease 

Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, 2010 

[accessed 2011 Oct 19].

Also visit The Evaluation Center at Western Michigan University online for a free evaluation 

report checklist:

http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/checklist_topics/.
82 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

STEP 6: 6.2 COMMUNICATING RESULTS EXERCISE

Your evaluation results may not reach the intended audience with the intended impact 

just because they are published. An intentional communication and dissemination plan 

should be included in your evaluation plan. As previously stated, the planning stage is 

the time for the program to address the best way to share the lessons you will learn from 

the evaluation. The communication-dissemination phase of the evaluation is a two-way 

process designed to support use of the evaluation results for program improvement and 

decision making. In order to achieve this outcome, a program must translate evaluation 

results into practical applications and must systematically distribute the information or 

knowledge through a variety of audience-specific strategies. 

Communicating evaluation results involves sharing information in ways that make it 

understandable and useful to stakeholders. Successful communication is key to your 

evaluation results being used. You can do this by using a variety of communication formats 

and channels. A communication format is the actual layout of the communication you will use, 

such as reports, brochures, one-page descriptions, newsletters, executive summaries, slides, 

and fact sheets. A communication channel is the route of communication you will use, such as 

oral presentations, videos, e-mails, webcasts, news releases, and phone conferences. Both 

the formats and channels should take into account the needs of different audiences, the type 

of information you wish to provide, and the purpose of the communication. 

When developing your communication or dissemination strategy, carefully consider the 

following:

 With which target audiences or groups of stakeholders will you share findings

What formats and channels will you use to share findings?

When and how often do you plan to share findings?

Who is responsible for carrying out dissemination strategies?

You can use the following matrix to help you plan your communication process.
83

1 2 3 4 5 6

What do you want to 

communicate?

To whom do you want 

to communicate?

How do you want to communicate?

Format(s) Channel(s)

** This tool was adapted from DASH’s Communication Matrix in Using Evaluation to Improve Programs: 

Strategic Planning in the Strategic planning kit for school health programs. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/

healthyyouth/evaluation/sp_toolkit.htm [accessed 2011 Oct 19].

This tool can help you track communications with your various audiences, including the 

communication format(s) (the layout of the communication, such as newsletters) and the 

communication channel(s) (the route of communication, such as oral presentations), audience 

feedback on the communication message, and next steps you need to take in response.

Communication Date Communication

Format(s)

Communication

Channel(s)

Audience 

Feedback

and Next Steps
84 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

A second example of a tracking chart might look like this:

Target Audience 

(Priority)

Objectives for the 

Communication Tools Timetable

Here is the example from the workbook:

Figure 5: Communication Plan Table 

Target Audience 

(Priority)

Goals Tools Timetable

Program Implementation 

Team

Inform them in real time 

about what’s working well 

and what needs to be 

quickly adjusted during 

implementation

Monthly meetings and 

briefing documents

Monthly

Program Stakeholders Promote program progress Success stories Annually

Funding Decision Makers Continue and/or enhance 

program funding

Executive summary; 

Targeted program briefs

Within 90 days of 

conclusion of funding
85

1 2 3 4 5 6

What do you want to 

communicate?

To whom do you want 

to communicate?

How do you want to communicate?

Format(s) Channel(s)
86 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

1 2 3 4 5 6

Communication Date Communication

Format(s)

Communication

Channel(s)

Audience 

Feedback

and Next Steps
87

1 2 3 4 5 6

Target Audience 

(Priority)

Objectives for the 

Communication Tools Timetable
88 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

OUTLINE: 7.1 BASIC ELEMENTS OF AN EVALUATION PLAN

Often, programs have multiple funding sources and, thus, may have multiple evaluation 

plans. Ideally, your program will develop one overarching evaluation plan that consolidates 

all activities and provides an integrated view of program assessment. Then, as additional 

funding sources are sought and activities added, those evaluation activities can be 

enfolded into the larger logic model and evaluation scheme. 

Your plan should be adapted to your specific evaluation needs and context. Additionally, 

it is important to remember that your evaluation plan is a living, dynamic document 

designed to adapt to the complexities of the environment within which your programs are 

implemented. The plan is a guide to facilitate intentional decisions. If changes are made, 

they are documented and done intentionally with a fully informed ESW.

The basic elements of an evaluation plan include:

 Title pag

Question overview

Intended use and users

Program description

Evaluation focus

Methods

Analysis and interpretation plan

Use, dissemination, and sharing plan

OUTLINE: 7.2 EVALUATION PLAN SKETCHPAD

Often, groups do not have the luxury of months to develop an evaluation plan. In many 

scenarios, a program team has only one opportunity to work with their ESW to develop 

their evaluation plan to submit with a funding proposal. All of the work discussed in this 

workbook must be accomplished in a single workgroup meeting, retreat, or conference 

session. In this scenario, it is helpful to have an evaluation sketchpad to develop the 

backbone or skeleton outline of your evaluation plan. With the major components of 

your evaluation plan developed, you will have the elements necessary to submit a basic 

evaluation plan that can be further developed with your funder and future stakeholders. 

Even if you have time to fully develop a mature evaluation plan, this sketchpad exercise is 

often a great tool to use to work with an ESW in a retreat type setting.
89

1. First, brainstorm a list of stakeholders for your evaluation project.

Priority Person/Group Comments

2. Go back to your list and circle high-priority stakeholders or high-priority information 

needs.
90 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

From the list of high-priority stakeholders identified above, think about their information 

needs from the evaluation or about the program. 

Primary Intended User Information Needed

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Discuss the intended uses of the evaluation by primary intended users and program staff:

Primary Intended User/Program Staff Intended Uses

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.
91

3. Discuss potential political agendas or environmental constraints (Hidden agendas—

from stakeholders, team members, company). What goals and objectives for the 

evaluation do stakeholders come to the table with before you even begin the 

evaluation? What is most important to each of the stakeholders at the table?

Stakeholder Goals/Objectives

4. Briefly describe your program (in your plan you will include your logic model(s) if you 

have one):

Description of Program:
92 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

5. Think back to your program description you just wrote. Where are you in your 

program’s growth (beginning, middle, mature)?

Stage of Growth:

6. Based on where you are in your program’s growth, what does that tell you about 

what kinds of questions you can ask?

Stage of Growth Questions

Beginning

Middle

Mature
93

7. Based on your program’s growth, your list of high-priority stakeholders and highpriority information needs, as well as your information needs, what are your possible 

evaluation questions?

Your evaluation questions for the current evaluation are:

8. Now, take each question and think about ways you might answer that question. 

Will your method be qualitative, quantitative or both? Do you already have a 

data source? Will you have some success stories? How much will it cost? What 

resources do you have? Who needs to be involved to make the evaluation a 

success? How will you ensure use of lessons learned? How and when will you 

disseminate information? Below are two samples of tables you can use to organize 

this information.
94 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

Evaluation 

Question

Indicator/ 

Performance 

Measure

Method Data Source Frequency Responsibility
95

Evaluation 

Question

Indicator/ 

Performance 

Measure

Method Data 

Source

Frequency Responsibility Cost

Considerations
96 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

9. Now think about the different ways you might communicate information from the 

evaluation to stakeholders. Communication may include information to stakeholders 

not on your ESW. You may want to provide preliminary results, success stories, etc. 

throughout the evaluation. Additionally, your ESW may assist in your communication 

efforts. What deadlines must be met and what opportunities are lost if deadlines are 

not met. How will this impact the timetable you created in #8?
97

What do you want to 

communicate?

To whom do you want 

to communicate?

How do you want to communicate?

Format(s) Channel(s)
98 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

LOGIC MODEL EXAMPLES

OSH Logic Models Example Preventing Initiation of Tobacco Use Among Young People
99

Eliminating Nonsmokers’ Exposure to Secondhand Smoke
100 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan Promoting Quitting Among Adults and Young People
101

State NPAO Program—Detailed Logic Model (FOA 805 & TA Manual)

DNPAO Logic Model Example
102 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

Resources *

*Resources are listed for the convenience of the user and do not constitute endorsement 

by the U.S. Government.

WEB RESOURCES

American Evaluation Association

 http://www.eval.org

The American Evaluation Association (AEA) is an international professional 

association of evaluators devoted to the application and exploration of program 

evaluation, personnel evaluation, technology, and many other forms of evaluation. 

Evaluation involves assessing the strengths and weaknesses of programs, policies, 

personnel, products, and organizations to improve their effectiveness. AEA has 

approximately 5,500 members representing all 50 states in the United States as well 

as over 60 foreign countries. [accessed 2011 Jul 19]

Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC) Division of Adolescent and School 

Health’s Program Evaluation Resources and Tools

http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/evaluation/resources.htm

CDC Division of Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention’s Practical Use of Program 

Evaluation among Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Programs

http://www.cdc.gov/std/program/pupestd/Introduction-SPREADS.pdf

CDC Framework for Program Evaluation

http://www.cdc.gov/eval/framework/index.htm

Effective program evaluation is a systematic way to improve and account for public 

health actions that involve procedures that are useful, feasible, ethical, and accurate. 

The framework guides public health professionals in their use of program evaluation. 

It is a practical, nonprescriptive tool, designed to summarize and organize essential 

elements of program evaluation. The framework comprises steps in program 

evaluation practice and standards for effective program evaluation. Adhering to the 

steps and standards of this framework will allow an understanding of each program’s 

context and will improve how program evaluations are conceived and conducted.
103

CDC Introduction to Program Evaluation for Public Health Programs: A Self Study Guide

 http://www.cdc.gov/getsmart/program-planner/downloads/Manual_04062006.pd

Disseminating Program Achievements and Evaluation Findings to Garner Support

http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/evaluation/pdf/brief9.pdf

Impact and Value: Telling Your Program’s Story

http://www.cdc.gov/oralhealth/publications/library/success_stories_wkbk.htm

National Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Program’s Evaluation Guides: Writing 

SMART Objectives; Developing and Using Logic Models

http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/programs/nhdsp_program/evaluation_guides/logic_

model.htm

Penn State Extension Program Evaluation Resources

http://extension.psu.edu/evaluation/

Western Michigan University: The Evaluation Center 

http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/

This site provides refereed checklists for designing, budgeting, contracting, staffing, 

managing, and assessing evaluations of programs, personnel, students, and 

other evaluations; collecting, analyzing, and reporting evaluation information; and 

determining merit, worth, and significance. Each checklist is a distillation of valuable 

lessons learned from practice.

University of Wisconsin Extension: Program Development and Evaluation publications

http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/evaldocs.html

This site provides a range of publications for planning and implementing an 

evaluation and offers online evaluation curriculums and courses.

W.K. Kellogg Foundation: Logic Model and Development Guide

http://www.wkkf.org/knowledge-center/resources/2006/02/WK-KelloggFoundation-Logic-Model-Development-Guide.aspx

A guide to logic modeling to facilitate program planning and implementation activities. 
104 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

MAKING YOUR IDEAS STICK, REPORTING, AND PROGRAM 

PLANNING

Atkinson C. Beyond Bullet Points: Using Microsoft Office PowerPoint 2007 to Create 

Presentations That Inform, Motivate, and Inspire. Microsoft Press, 2007.

Becker HS. Writing for Social Scientist: How to Start and Finish Your Thesis, Book, or 

Article. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2077, 2nd ed.

Heath C, Heath, D. Made to Stick: Why some Ideas Survive and Others Die. New York, NY: 

Random House, 2007.

Heath C, Heath D. Switch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard. New York, NY: 

Random House, 2010.

Impact and Value: Telling Your Program’s Story

 www.cdc.gov/oralhealth/publications/library/success_stories_wkbk.ht

Lavinghouze R, Price AW, Smith, KA. The Program Success Story: A Valuable Tool for 

Program Evaluation. Health Promotion Practice, 2007; 8(4): 323–331. 

Torres R, Preskill H, Piontek ME. Evaluation Strategies for Communicating and Reporting. 

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 2004, 2nd ed.

QUALITATIVE METHODS

Miles MB, Huberman, MA. Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage 

Publications, Inc., 1994, 2nd ed.

Patton M.Q. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage 

Publications, Inc., 2001, 3rd ed.

Yin RK. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Applied Social Research Methods) 

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 2008, 4th ed.

Yin RK. Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. New York, NY: The Guilford Press, 2010. 
105

QUANTITATIVE METHODS

Kleinbaum DG, Klein M. Logistic Regression: A Self-Learning Text (Statistics for Biology 

and Health. Springer, New York, NY, 2010, 3rd ed.

Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern Epidemiology. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott 

Williams & Wilkins, 2008, 3rd ed.

Tufte ER. Envisioning Information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press, 1990. 

Tufte ER. The Visual Display of quantitative Information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press, 2001. 

EVALUATION USE

Butterfoss FD. Coalitions and Partnerships in Community Health. San Francisco, CA: 

Jossey-Bass, 2007.

Mattessich PW. The Manager’s Guide to Program Evaluation: Planning, Contracting, and 

Managing for Useful Results. St. Paul, Minnesota: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation, 2003.

Patton MQ. Developmental Evaluation: Applying Complexity Concepts to Enhance 

Innovation and Use. New York, NY: The Guilford Press, 2010. 

Patton MQ. Utilization-Focused Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication, 2008, 

4th ed. 

OSH EVALUATION RESOURCES

Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs—2007 

 http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/stateandcommunity/best_practices/index.ht

CDC’s Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs—2007 is an 

evidence-based guide to help states plan and establish effective tobacco control 

programs to prevent and reduce tobacco use.

Evaluation Toolkit for Smoke-Free Policies 

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/secondhand_smoke/evaluation_

toolkit/index.htm

The evaluation approaches described in this toolkit and the findings of studies 

conducted using these approaches may also be useful to stakeholders who are 

interested in the effects of smoke-free laws, including business organizations (e.g., 

chambers of commerce, restaurant associations) and labor unions.
106 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

Introduction to Process Evaluation in Tobacco Use Prevention and Control 

 www.cdc.gov/tobacco/tobacco_control_programs/surveillance_evaluation/process

evaluation/index.htm

Published in 2008, this guide will help state and federal program managers and 

evaluation staff design and implement valid, reliable process evaluations for 

tobacco use prevention and control programs.

Introduction to Program Evaluation for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs 

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/tobacco_control_programs/surveillance_evaluation/

evaluation_manual/index.htm

Published in 2001, this “how to” guide for planning and implementing evaluation 

activities will help state tobacco control program managers and staff in the planning, 

design, implementation, and use of practical and comprehensive evaluations of 

tobacco control efforts.

Key Outcome Indicators for Evaluating Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/tobacco_control_programs/surveillance_evaluation/

key_outcome/index.htm

Published in 2005, this guide provides information on 120 key outcome indicators for 

evaluation of statewide comprehensive tobacco prevention and control programs.

Question Inventory on Tobacco (QIT)

http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/qit/quickSearch.aspx

This Web-based tool developed by CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health 

categorizes more than 6,000 tobacco-related questions. This site can be used to 

collect information on survey questions used in the past, locate available data for 

secondary analyses, and gather ideas for future instrument development.

Quitlines: A Resource for Development, Implementation, and Evaluation

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/quit_smoking/cessation/quitlines/index.htm

This 2005 document is intended to help state health departments, health care 

organizations, and employers to contract for and monitor telephone-based tobacco 

cessation services. It is also designed to help states, health care organizations, and 

quitline operators enhance existing quitline services and to inform those who are 

interested in learning more about population-based approaches to tobacco cessation.
107

Smoking—Attributable Mortality, Morbidity, and Economic Costs (SAMMEC)

 http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/sammec

This online application allows you to estimate the health and health-related 

economic consequences of smoking to adults and infants.

State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/statesystem

The STATE System is an electronic data warehouse containing up-to-date and 

historical state-level data on tobacco use prevention and control.

Surveillance and Evaluation Data Resources for Comprehensive Tobacco Control 

Programs

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/tobacco_control_programs/surveillance_evaluation/

surveillance_manual/index.htm

Published in 2001, this compilation of data sources for tobacco control programs is 

useful for tobacco control programs that are conducting surveillance or evaluation.

Surveillance and Evaluation Net-Conferences

Archived presentations available at: http://www.ttac.org/resources/cdc_

netconferences.html

The Surveillance and Evaluation Net-conference series provides information on 

evaluation best and promising practices and describes the role of evaluation in 

tobacco control work. The Net-conference series was originally designed for state 

surveillance and evaluation staff, but the material covers a variety of interesting 

and emerging topics in surveillance and evaluation that are valuable to other public 

health professionals. Each conference consists of a lecture followed by a question 

and answer session.

Surveillance and Evaluation Web page on CDC-OSH’s Smoking and Tobacco Use website 

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/tobacco_control_programs/surveillance_evaluation/

index.htm

Tobacco Control State Highlights 2010

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/state_data/state_highlights/2010/index.htm
108 | Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan

 Tobacco Control State Highlights 2010 guides states in developing and

implementing high-impact strategies and assessing their performance. This report 

also provides state-specific data intended to—highlight how some states are 

making great strides in reducing smoking rates using evidence-based strategies 

while also showing that more work needs to be done in other states, enable readers 

to see how their own states perform, and help policymakers with decision making.

DNPAO EVALUATION RESOURCES

Developing and Using an Evaluation Consultation Group

http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/downloads/EvaluationConsultationGroup.pdf

An Evaluation Consultation Group (ECG) is required for all state obesity programs 

funded by the Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity (DNPAO) to 

provide technical, programmatic, and related input to the program evaluation of 

the state health department’s NPAO work. This guidance provides a systematic 

approach to evaluating an ECG including a series of steps and tools for conducting 

the evaluation. 

Evaluation of State Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity Plans

www.cdc.gov/obesity/downloads/EvaluationofStateNPAOPlans.pdf

This guide clarifies approaches to and methods of evaluation; provides examples 

and tools specific to the scope and purpose of state nutrition, physical activity and 

obesity programs; and recommends resources for additional reading.

Evaluation: Quick Start Resources

http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/physical/pdf/PA_evaluation_quick_start.pdf

This resource provides a list of key references and tools for planning and 

implementing program and/or project evaluations, focusing specifically on physical 

activity programs and evaluations.

Recommended Community Strategies and Measurements to Prevent Obesity in the 

United States

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5807a1.htm

This report identifies and recommends a set of 24 strategies and associated 

measurements that communities and local governments can use to plan and 

monitor environmental and policy-level changes for obesity prevention.